FISK AFLOAT

NRO’s John O’Sullivan on Robert Fisk’s hilarious Lateline performance:

A polite interviewer, asking straightforward (though increasingly astonished) questions, reveals Fisk to be a curious combination of poseur and fanatic. I would guess this would finish him except that nothing ever does. He is kept afloat by the self-deception of his readership.

Today’s Australian also takes a look at flailing Fisk, whose opinions, as expressed on Lateline, are beautifully condensed by reader K. Bowman:

Fisk’s points are all very simple. Zarqawi is just a figurehead whom we just are encouraged to loathe, who, at the end of the day, is not a person whom we need to worry about. Although he is a problem for all of us (Fisk, too). The West bestializes Zarqawi, although he is genuinely a bad guy (no doubt about it). It is wrong for us to paint the Middle East as a fight between good and evil, although Bin Laden and Zarqawi are monstrous. We created Zarqawi, although he created himself, and we helped, although he used to exist as a fantasy figure created by American propaganda. The media perpetuates these myths every time it blames Zarqawi, although he is to blame, and it would be absolutely wrong for reporters to ignore the things he is to blame for. Zarqawi’s existence supports American propaganda, but his continued existence is also a severe blow to American credibility.

You stupid Blairites all are just too dumb to understand nuance.

Posted by Tim B. on 04/27/2006 at 11:26 PM
    1. Someone should ask him what happened to Jake Kovko.

      Posted by ilibcc on 2006 04 27 at 11:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. Fisk was definitely under the influence of something.  I could swear that he’d been drinking, but let’s give the guy a break here.  He has always been very lucid and clear.

      Zarqawi is what, a one legged man with more lives than a cat and who seems to cop the blame for everything that goes wrong in Iraq.  He is only of consequence because the Bush administration needed a Bin Laden facsimile to rally the public.

      It’s not like Iraq will become a bed of roses when he’s gone (if he’s still alive that is).

      And incidentally, the Turks are amassing on the southern border of Kurdistan, ready to take on the PKK.  Meanwhile, Rice is doing a tap dance trying to keep both teams on side.

      Iraq is continuing to move from a total screw up to worse.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 27 at 11:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. What a worm.

      Small wonder LGF’s “Idiotarian of the Year” award is named after this twerp.

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 04 27 at 11:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. #2 Brave call, but right on Adammo,

      We are being too quick to rush to judgment upon those who kidnap people and decapitate them. Who are we to judge?

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 28 at 12:08 AM • permalink

 

    1. Wow thats real nuance for you. If only we could all reach the level of thought attained by Fisk.

      Whats the famous saying ? Free your minds to release your brain ? 🙂

      Posted by Jono on 2006 04 28 at 12:10 AM • permalink

 

    1. In the days when I worked in the Tropics, anyone who behaved like this would be referred to as having gone ‘Troppo’.  Of course the real explanation was usually alcohol, but going Troppo was somehow a more socially acceptable term.

      Then again for Fisk there could be another possibility such as the onset of ‘Senile Dementia’ or its modern euphemism ‘Alzheimer’s Disease’.

      However, if he really meant what he said…

      Posted by Wand on 2006 04 28 at 12:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. An excellent editorial by The Australian.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 04 28 at 12:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. “You stupid Blairites are all just too dumb to understand nuance.”

      Oh! The horror of it all.  Up the intellectual creek without a padle!  Thrash Thrash

      The Americans created this butcher for propaganda purposes.  Ok

      Was this before or after he created himself.  Dooo!

      This is harder to understand than Cricket!

      (head bowed, a Yojimbo slinks off to bed)

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 04 28 at 12:47 AM • permalink

 

    1. “…let’s give the guy a break here.  He has always been very lucid and clear.”

      Compared to what, a headless chicken with its tail on fire? This is the man who famously apologized to some Afghan thugs for beating him over the head and trying to steal his laptop, and who has emitted some of the most homoerotically sycophantic tongue-bathing of Osama Bin Laden that I have ever seen. It was the sort of stuff that probably made Bin Laden’s own admirers back away shaking their heads, murmuring “TMI.”

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 04 28 at 12:57 AM • permalink

 

    1. He has always been very lucid and clear

      Bollocks!  He’s the greatest gob-shite to walk the earth.

      Posted by murph on 2006 04 28 at 12:58 AM • permalink

 

    1. Well then again he was very lucid and clear on how much he though Osama was the bees’ knees, so maybe I’m being unfair. “Iraqi is not Bosnia” must mean something somewhere, maybe in those rarified atmospheres where the real “clear thinkers” live.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 04 28 at 01:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. He has always been very lucid and clear.

      Excuse me, Addamo, but your parental units back on Remulak called a while ago.  Said something about not staying up late, even if you are on vacation.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 01:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. Jeff, I think you’ll find Addamo’s “parental unit” is in fact Robert Fisk himself.

      Would explain a lot…

      Posted by Quentin George on 2006 04 28 at 01:17 AM • permalink

 

    1. Additionally, I’d never thought I’d see the words “lucid and clear” and “Robert Fisk” is the same sentence without the qualifier “not at all”.

      What an age we live in!

      Posted by Quentin George on 2006 04 28 at 01:18 AM • permalink

 

    1. Fisk was definitely under the influence of something.  I could swear that he’d been drinking, but let’s give the guy a break here.

      Yeah, give him a break. He’s not an idiot, he was just drunk or high during a scheduled television appearance. Let’s not impugn the man’s credibility.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 28 at 01:18 AM • permalink

 

    1. QG

      That’s hilarious.  I was just about to say that.  In fact, I just googled

      “Robert Fisk” “lucid and clear”

      The name and phrase do not appear together in any paragraph in the known Googleverse.

      Posted by murph on 2006 04 28 at 01:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. I still say we must get him on “Big Brother” with Galloway and finally we will be rid of this idiot.

      Posted by the nailgun on 2006 04 28 at 01:34 AM • permalink

 

    1. By the way has everyone been over to Captains Quarters to sign up for his new 101st Fighting Keyboarders to agitate the hell out of lefties over the tied old chickenhawk tag. An inspired idea

      Posted by the nailgun on 2006 04 28 at 01:46 AM • permalink

 

    1. Again, K. Bowman, a nice piece of work.  Question:  Did you write for “Yes, Minister”?

      About the problems in Iraq, specifically the way Turkey is amassing on the Kurds southern border (if I got it right):  How’d that happen?  How did the Turks manage to invade northern Iraq right above the Sunni Triangle and just below Mosul?  I haven’t looked at a map lately, so it is entirely possible that I’ve misremembered my geography, but it sounds like you’re saying that Coalition and Iraqi forces have allowed Turkey to send troops into Sunni Iraq in order to cut the Kurds off.

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 28 at 02:23 AM • permalink

 

    1. Mr. Fisk needs a good massage—alas, it’s beyond the powers of MissM to oblige.

      The images of jellyfish exploding are more than a professional woman can stomach.

      Posted by MissM on 2006 04 28 at 02:29 AM • permalink

 

    1. #2 Addummo, yer a complete screwball. This notion of Zarqawi as an invention of the US has been makking the rounds since late 2003.

      And you can Fuck Turkey, too.

      NE Syria, SE Turkey, NW Iran and ALL of Northern Iraq IS Kurdistan.

      As old as I am, I swear by all that is Holy that if the Turks lift a fucking finger in Kurdistan and the US doesn’t back the Kurds, I will personally go to the frontline on which ever border the Peshmergah point me to and help these courageous and steadfast people.

      And—if I live long enough—I’ll blog back to you on what happens.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 28 at 02:32 AM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo,

      Please, I beg of you, see a mental health professional immediately.

      Simply being able to use the phrase “lucid and clear” with serious intent is indicative of organic problems. Applying the phrase to Robert Fisk is at least bordering on insanity if not actually over the line. You need help before you become a danger to yourself and your neighbors.

      Regards,
      Ric

      Posted by Ric Locke on 2006 04 28 at 02:34 AM • permalink

 

    1. (Voice & demeanor of Mr Burns.)

      Ah, Mr Addamo.  Welcome.  We at “FrootLoopCare.com” (NADAQ: FLCA) value your business.  As you know, we don’t care what institution you have escaped from, we are honoured that you have chosen to visit us today for some attention.

      Now, Mr Paco will shortly hook you up to his patented Drivel Analyser (TM) for a proper analysis, but I don’t really think we need to wait for that do we?  If you used the words “Fisk” and “lucid” in the same sentance you are obviously beyond pain.  Go sit on the freeway will you?

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 28 at 02:47 AM • permalink

 

    1. Gee Addamo, Bush and Zarqawi do have alot in common, you say

      Zarqawi is what, a one legged man with more lives than a cat and who seems to cop the blame for everything that goes wrong in Iraq.

      Don’t you guys blame Bush for everything that goes wrong in the US?

      Posted by the nailgun on 2006 04 28 at 02:56 AM • permalink

 

    1. Zarqawi has certainly had a few close calls, but to say he’s a creation of the U.S is part and parcel of the dinosaur Left’s tendency to magical thinking: the source of all evil is the U.S so if someone is a murderous bastard he must have been created or facilitated by the U.S. With the correct conclusion in place all that’s needed is to go find the facts to fit it, ignoring anything that doesn’t fit.

      Yes, it’s as dumb as it sounds but religious fanatics are some of the world’s most functionally stupid people. Fisk is seeing reality intrude on his leftist dogma, he’s finding it harder and harder to fit the square pegs of observed events into the round holes of his sacred scripture and cognitive dissonance is ensuing, hence the twitchy, sweaty, rambling incoherence.  The problem for trash like Fisk is that their ‘anti-imperialist’ freedom fighting little jihadi friends aren’t playing ball and giving their western facilitators and apologists enough plausible deniability to use as a cover. It’s hard to keep touting Zarqawi as a fighter for Iraqi independence and freedom when he keeps murdering defenseless people and vowing to crush the Iraqis under a new Islamic dictatorship.

      But Fisk is trying, he’s trying his little heart out, and that’s why that piece of shit is going to burn in hell.

      Posted by Amos on 2006 04 28 at 04:50 AM • permalink

 

    1. Fisk trades on his long residency and association with the middle east to pass himself of as some unimpeachable face of authority (or at least his fans do).

      I’ve come across quite a few people in my time who have used time in country as their credential to analyse the political, economic and social aspects of their adopted homeland/region. The trouble is that long familiarity with a culture isn’t enough to make up for biased or deficient anayltical skills.  I know plenty of Australians who are intimately knowledgeable about Australia but that doesn’t mean i’d bet my house on their opinion on economic or social developments.

      Posted by Francis H on 2006 04 28 at 05:08 AM • permalink

 

    1. As old as I am, I swear by all that is Holy that if the Turks lift a fucking finger in Kurdistan and the US doesn’t back the Kurds…

      The Kurds are decent people, have always supported us, and are the only people in the Middle East outside of the Israelis who like us. Therefore, we will abandon them. Again.

      We have a bizarre foreign policy that we must treat friendly nations like crap. I think it’s a State Department thing – if you’re pro-American, you must be evil.

      Kinda like our immigration policy – kiss the asses of 10,000,000 illegals, but make it difficult as hell for 65,000 educated legal immigrants to come here. Welcome, Pedro the Sheetrock-Hanging Rapist; take a number and park your ass, Christopher Hitchens.

      Sorry for the bile, but the economically-illiterate gas-price whining is driving me up a wall and making me hate my retarded countrymen.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 28 at 05:50 AM • permalink

 

    1. Perhaps Fisk has been using this.

      Posted by AlphaMikeFoxtrot on 2006 04 28 at 06:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Dave S.: you too?

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 04 28 at 06:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. Oops, posted too soon. I meant to say—I feel your pain. My office moved about five miles away from its previous location and I’ve heard nothing but bellyaching about the traffic and the price of gas and how it’s all the president’s fault for starting the war. Seems to me the price of gas has been going up steadily for ages now along with everything else and would have continued to do so no matter who was president or whether we were at war but what do I know.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 04 28 at 06:39 AM • permalink

 

    1. So sorry I missed the parry guys.  Part and parcel of existing in a different time zone.

      Didn’t realize I had struck such a verve. I noticed very few people managed to post any links, which just about says it all, but why let details get I the way of a perfectly good lynching of Fisk right?  I assume what put so many people’s noses out of joint about Fisk,, is that he was right about Zarqawi.

      You see, what Fisk said was pretty much confirmed by the US military in an April 10th Washington Post article,
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/09/AR2006040900890_pf.html
      “The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to internal military documents and officers familiar with the program. The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.”

      http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002314713
      The Post even described how the Pentagon had concocted fake Al-Zarqawi letters boasting about suicide attacks and leaked them to Dexter Filkins of the New York Times, who splashed it on the front page the next day. Despite the fact that Filkins had severe doubts about the authenticity of the letter, the Times got down on their knees, licked boots, and published it anyway.

      Finally, let’s be reminded that Zarqawi would be six foot under by now had Bush actually gone ahead with plans to bomb Zarqawi’s camp in Kurdistan, prior to the invasion.

      http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

      “But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger.”

      Seems the Bush gang figured that ZArqawi was more use to them alive, so that Powell could run to the UN and tell what a bad boy Saddam was for letting him stay.  Forget that Zarqawi’s camp was outside Saddam’s reach and under the no fly zones.

      What is so ironic, is that the US the military leadership has the nerve to claims its propaganda doesn’t target US citizens and only appears in ‘liberated’ Iraqi newspapers, when it clearly has managed top stifled the ability of a good many posters here to think for themselves.

      The same documents directly state that the false promotion of Al-Zarqawi includes marking the the “U.S. Home Audience” as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.”

      Transcripts of meetings between the Joint Chiefs of Staff talk about turning Al-Zarqawi into a caricature and making him appear, “more important than he really is.”
      And here endeth the lesson.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 08:58 AM • permalink

 

    1. I’ve heard nothing but bellyaching about the traffic and the price of gas and how it’s all the president’s fault for starting the war

      Well of course it the presidents fault.

      This photo is the reason all of the worlds woes are his fault. The fellow mugged by our president is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, elder brother Dadmoud Ahmadinejad.

      The fact that heretofore dormant economies, have exploded (read China, for one) into promience over they past 10-20 years, no drilling for oil allowed in a scant 2000 total acres out of God knows how many millions of acres in Alaska, no drilling off and around Florida, as the Chinese are about to do in the Straits of Florida, no additional refining capacity being allowed, no nuclear facilities being allowed, hell not even windfarms thanks to Teddy, more Americans (legal and illegal) driving, flying, boating AND the fact that Americans (legal and illegal) have allowed the buffoons WE elect, to do absolutely nothing about this and/or the above, for at least a 30 year period, has NOT a damn thing to do wih our present state.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 09:04 AM • permalink

 

    1. Dave S. and Andrea:

      Couldn’t agree more.  Did you happen to catch Neil Cavuto’s take down of Dick Durbin yesterday on Fox?  Durbin was truly “Fiskian” in his responses.  Blathering on about “Big Oil” and “Bush’s gas hikes.”  Yikes.  What a freaking idiot.  Check it out at http://www.exposetheleft.com. Economics 101, capitalism, market fluctuations are lost on him.

      Michael Totten has some great insight on the Kurds.  There is, apparently, a strong arm move going on in Turkey with their Kurdish population that is only getting worse.  They—the Kurds—really are a great people and more deserving of our support than many of our erstwhile “allies.”

      Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 04 28 at 09:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Actually, what puts our noses out of joint about Fisk is that he’s treated as an “expert” on the ME when what he often does is inject his own biases into his reporting (when he’s not making huge factual errors; check out his book reviews sometime.)

      He’s rarely called on it; when he is, you get a screaming, red-faced rant about how he’s being misrepresented or taken out of context.

      Posted by RyanOH on 2006 04 28 at 09:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. Ah, Addamo, ‘tis a pity all that energy is wasted on supporting a stupid meme.

      OK, accepting for the sake of argument that we missed chances to kill Zarqawi….so what?  Fisk’s “argument” (or part of it, anywho) is that Zarqawi is a figurehead.  Thus, by your idol’s “logic”, killing Zarqawi would be immaterial, as we need not worry about him.

      Why waste all those pixels in circular logic, Addamo?  You actually had us when you described Fisk as “lucid and clear”.

      Had us laughing our butts of, that is.

      Run along now, I can hear your parential units calling you home.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 09:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. The_Real_Jeff,

      Like the arse backwards logic.  You have evidently been working hard to perfect it. .  Isn’t Iraq part of the “war on terror”?  Does that not imply the killing, arresting, capturing terrorists – big and small?  Yes Zarqawi is a bad seed, so why not kill the arsewipe rather than leave him be and then run screaming to the UN that Saddam`s been playing with bad people?

      So what you say?  Hasn’t Zarqawi been blamed for the deaths of thousands of people – or whatever the number is these days?  Could it be that killing him to begin with would have meant those thousand sod people would be still alive.  I realize it’s a stretch for you, but have a think about it?

      I’m still trying to get use to his technique you guys use of sucking on a half dozen lemons before posting.  Who came up with that?

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. RyanOH,

      Bias in reporting? Well I never.  What a relief we have Murdoch on prowl and all setting the record straight.

      I agree that Fisk should be confronted more often, as should all journalists.  The problem is that his critics tend to do so when he’s not looking, so it’s natural that such opinions come off as sour grapes.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:41 AM • permalink

 

    1. Yes Zarqawi is a bad seed, so why not kill the arsewipe rather than leave him be and then run screaming to the UN that Saddam`s been playing with bad people?

      Tsk, tsk, tsk—moving the goal posts, eh, Addamo?  I never said that Zarqawi shouldn’t be killed.  Fisk said that Zarqawi is a figurehead…therefore, I concluded by Fisk’s logic, Zarqawi’s death is immaterial, since a figurehead is not important.  I happen to disagree with Fisk (in case you hadn’t noticed), but that’s not the point.

      This discussion is about Fisk being “lucid and clear”, your original comment on this thread.

      YOU argue that Zarqawi should be killed, which goes against what Fisk says.  Indeed, one of the first things Fisk said in his interview was “So, the individuals per se don’t actually matter anymore, but that’s something which I think the Americans don’t yet grasp.”  Therefore, Zarqawi is not important.

      Yet you hammer in the point that Zarqawi is not dead, in spite of Coalition efforts, even though the civilized world would prefer that he is.  As though he is important.  Even though Fisk (who you state “…has always been very lucid and clear”) says Zarqawi, as an individual, is not important.

      Can’t have it both ways, Addamo.  Unless, of course, you are simply snarking because Fisk is indefensible.  Which any one reading and comprehending that transcript would realize.

      Which bring me to the question….just who are you to comment on anything or anyone being “lucid and clear”?

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 01:02 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo, are you getting bored over at Lowenstein’s blog since he started blocking the comments that you have to come here for debate.
      I haven’t been able to get any comments through there for months even though I’ve never been offensive, I’ve only ever pointed out his lies politely. Yet he continues to let through all that anti-semitic crap.  He let’s through a few critical comments just to give the impression that he allows debate but he’s a fraud.

      Posted by Melanie on 2006 04 28 at 01:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey Melanie,

      Long time no blog.  Actually, no, I stil frequent AL’s blog, but been meaning to come here to join the lions den for a while.

      I haven’t been able to get any comments through there for months even though I’ve never been offensive, I’ve only ever pointed out his lies politely.

      I agree that your comments were far from offensive.  It’s true that Al can be a touch sensitive, but then again, threw were a few that gave ample reason for him to resort to such measures.

      But honestly, his heart’s is n the right place.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 01:37 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo,  So pointing out his lies is ample reason to ban me?  His heart is not in the right place.  If you were a Jew you would see how much hate he has for Jews and only uses his Jewishness to get apointed to boards and get books published at Universities where likeminded people share his hatred of Jews.  If he wasn’t Jewish, he wouldn’t be taken seriously by anyone.

      Posted by Melanie on 2006 04 28 at 01:48 PM • permalink

 

    1. Melanie,

      While you often disagreed with AL, I’m afraid to say that you rarely managed to prove that you were right and he was wrong.

      Seemed to me that you were just as selective about your facts and he is.  That makes both of you right, or both of you wrong – depending on how you look at it.

      I do respect you Melanie, and I am aware of your personal history Melanie. No one can blame you for your perspective, but how long are you going to defend your position by suggesting that your personal family tragedy gives you the right to be irrational?

      Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that is the defence you frequently used when we butted heads.

      Those who read AL are not driven by a hatred of Jews.  That is ridiculous and you know it.  whose who read Chomskym, Fisk and Filkenstein are not Jews haters, in fact you’ll find the reality to be quite the opposite.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 02:20 PM • permalink

 

    1. But honestly, his heart’s is n the right place.

      What a pity his head’s firmly planted up his ass, though.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 04 28 at 03:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. I am saddened, but not surprised, to see my analysis of Mr. Robert Fisk’s subtle logic used for the purpose of ridiculing him.  Since when has it been intellectually disrespectable to argue several points of view that are logically incompatible or even complete polar opposites?  Is there no room for complexity of thought anymore?  Shame on you Tim Blair!

      The seeming illogic of Fisk’s points dissolves when one views it in the context of his entire career, and these minor logical irregularities should be viewed as paling before irregularities on a much grander scale.

      Saltydog asks if I wrote for “Yes, Minister,” which is a question I intend to answer in the fullness of time, in due course, cicrumstances being favorable, at the appropriate juncture.

      Posted by K. Bowman on 2006 04 28 at 03:51 PM • permalink

 

    1. But honestly, his heart’s is n the right place.

      AL has a heart?

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 03:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. I am shocked, shocked, to find that the U.S. government has been engaging in the dissemination of propaganda – and in war time, too! I did not note in any of the articles cited that the authenticity of the letter leaked to the NYT was conclusively debunked. The significance of Zarqawi, at least in the early part of the war, was that he was the locus for terrorists, a rallying point for extremists committed to underming the allied effort in Iraq. He was (and perhaps still is) Al-Quaeda’s principal actor in Iraq, and maintains transnational terrorist links (Zarqawi’s people have been tracked and, I believe, arrested in France and Belgium). The fact that he is not a military threat on the order of, say, Iran does not in any way diminish his capacity for doing serious harm to the democratic process in Iraq. He is not, as Fisk would have it, a figurehead. Nor, for the record, is he an example of a disaffected intellectual who has latched onto extremism as the only alternative to Western influences: Zarqawi is, and has always been, a thug.

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 28 at 03:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. It would seem a pretty logical extrapolation to consider a partial admission from the Pentagon and US military of dissemination, as evidence of something of far greater magnitude.  To say that the authenticity of the letter leaked to the NYT was conclusively debunked, is feeble, considering that the authenticity of most of Zarqawi’s letters have only been corroborated by official sources.

      Even labelling Zarqawi as the locus of terror is a poor argument seeing as the terrorist label has been thrown around in Iraq to the point that is it now verging on meaningless.  The insurgency/resistance/whatever you wish to call it, in Iraq is almost entirely home grown.  The foreign component of which is a few percent.  It is domestic concerns that are fuelling this resistance, not foreign ideology.

      The allied effort in Iraq has managed to achieve the construction of the worlds largest military base (Camp Victory), and the worlds largest Embassy in Baghdad, while reconstruction efforts never got out of neutral.  The budget for Camp Victory was more than the entire budget set aside for Iraq’s reconstruction, (ie. the rebuilding of what the occupation blew up), and even that has been chewed up my security firms.  The US contractors that are making financial windfalls and hiring foreign workers, while Iraqis struggle to live.  It is clear to the locals that the allied efforts are not about the interests of the locals.  It does not need a Zarqawi to make this all too obvious to the Iraqis.

      While it is true that he is/was Al-Qaeda’s principal actor in Iraq, the so called apprehension of his co conspirators has become somewhat a joke given that his number 2 men have been captured on something like 30 occasions.  Perhaps he has perfected cloning techniques we are yet to discover.

      Zarqawi is not going to affect the democratic process in Iraq one iota.  If the US allow the Iraqi’s to have it, it will happen, but this is a big IF.  The US cannot afford to see an independent Iraqi leadership eventuate, that is not subservient to the US.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 04:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. “The insurgency/resistance/whatever you wish to call it, in Iraq is almost entirely home grown.”

      I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying here, or what your documentation is. If you’re suggesting that the insurgency is primarily composed of former Ba’athist elements, that may well be the case; however, it is naive to discount the foreign influence, whether it be Zarqawi or the Iranians. Your other main point seems to be that discontent in Iraq is primarily over “domestic” concerns. Such as what, exactly? Water supplies? Gasoline shortages? Important items, to be sure, but not enough to explain why Sunnis and Shiites are blowing up each others’ mosques.

      “It is clear to the locals that the allied efforts are not about the interests of the locals.” This is a sweeping generalization that smells strongly of some preconceived ideological notions. We’re certainly not in Iraq just to give the marines a work-out. Is it about oil? The prices in the U.S still seem to be going straight up. To provide “windfall” profits to contractors? Certainly contractors can land lucrative jobs in other parts of the world without having to worry about kidnapping and decapitation.

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 28 at 05:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. Zarqawi is not going to affect the democratic process in Iraq one iota

      Not once the Sunni, Shia, or BOTH strain his ass through a sausage maker.

      Even labelling (sic) Zarqawi as the locus of terror is a poor argument seeing as the terrorist label has been thrown around in Iraq to the point that is it now verging on meaningless.

      You could always brave up and give the world a first hand report…oh wait, you can’t…well, HEY…the yellow will eventually will wash off, then go.

      The US cannot afford to see an independent Iraqi leadership eventuate, that is not subservient to the US.

      God, you must be MENSA…you’re correct, just as WE demanded from France, Germany, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Japan…shit every footprint the U.S. made in this world…you’re right…it’s a colony.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 05:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo

      You missed a link.

      Clinton: My Bin Laden Confession Was ‘Inappropriate’

      TRANSCRIPT:

      Ex-President Clinton’s Remarks on Osama bin Laden
      Delivered to the Long Island Association’s Annual Luncheon
      Crest Hollow Country Club, Woodbury, NY
      Feb. 15, 2002

      A snippet…
      So we tried to be quite aggressive with them. We got – uh – well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan.

      And we’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again.

      They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.

      NewsMax

      You know what the above means, Mr. MENSA?…NO BALLS! But with that the case…I’m sure you know what it means….:).

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 05:17 PM • permalink

 

    1. Is it just me or does anyone else have no desire whatsoever to debate with a troll whom I’ve never heard of?  I have a feeling Addamo is not sincere in his viewpoints but is just trying to get his kicks stating an opposing view.

      I do admire his ample free time though.  Probably a high school or college student.  But what do they know?

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 28 at 05:18 PM • permalink

 

    1. I’m 40% sure we kicked his ribs in last week, under his old nom d’comment.
      Personally, I blame my slavedriving capitalist taskmasters for the all-too-light slappage he’s received here today.  Bastards.  Sometimes they expect me to do some actual work.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 28 at 05:34 PM • permalink

 

    1. The allied effort in Iraq has managed to achieve the construction of the worlds largest military base (Camp Victory), and the worlds largest Embassy in Baghdad, while reconstruction efforts never got out of neutral.  The budget for Camp Victory was more than the entire budget set aside for Iraq’s reconstruction, (ie. the rebuilding of what the occupation blew up), and even that has been chewed up my security firms.  The US contractors that are making financial windfalls and hiring foreign workers, while Iraqis struggle to live.  It is clear to the locals that the allied efforts are not about the interests of the locals.  It does not need a Zarqawi to make this all too obvious to the Iraqis.

      I beg to differ, Addamo.  During my deployment to Kuwait last year, I was a liaison officer for the US Army Corps of Engineers in Iraq, who is responsible for the Iraqi reconstruction effort.  USACE works with the State Department, Iraqi Ministry of Construction and Housing, and non-governmental organizations to help rebuild Iraq.  It’s an “official source”, but you might want to click here and do some reading.

      As far as reconstructions effort never leaving “neutral”, try this link to requests for proposals for work inside Iraq.  Or maybe this one.

      The Iraqi reconstruction effort, at my last review of the reports, was around $47 billion, between US tax money,  contributions from various nations, plus the stash of cash that Hussein had squirreled away.  The price to build and operate Camp Victory in Iraq is nowhere near that.  Spendy, yes, but nothing like what we are pouring into Iraq.

      Most of the off-base reconstruction work is going to Iraqi firms.  The work on the bases tend to go to big firms, yes, but the MILCON budget is nowhere near the Iraqi reconstruction budget.

      Not that I expect you to accept this, Addamo.  It’s pretty clear by your unsubstantiated assertions that you are inflexible.  Besides, it’s only “official corroboration”.  I post this only because someone too naive to understand your trifling ways might take you seriously, and they have something based in the real world to compare your rant with.  Thus my counterpost.

      ‘Nuff said.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 06:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Is it just me or does anyone else have no desire whatsoever to debate with a troll whom I’ve never heard of?” You mean, you have a troll directory?!? Why don’t you publish it, save us all some time(oh, I know; it’s one of those perquisites that Karl’s henchmen have, as opposed to the big fat nothing the rest of us in the lowing herd receive).

      Say, what am I supposed to do with this kid? I’m getting calls from Blockbuster Video about overdue DVD’s (including a very expensive new release called “Wet Burkas and Sheer Chadors”). And what’s he got against pork chops?

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 28 at 06:05 PM • permalink

 

    1. The Iranian influence in Iraq is certainly obvious, seeing as Al Sistani is an Iranian, but based simply on numbers, the percentage of foreign fighters is insignificant.
      Statistics gathered from Saudi Arabia of captured fighters had concluded that the majority of those joining the fight are otherwise moderate Muslims radicalized by the presence of the occupying forces in Iraq.

      The fact that the reconstruction of Iraq has been a complete failure is no ideological invention on my part.  The US has stated that the money has dried up (a large portion consumed by security) and the job will now be left to the Iraqis.

      Iraq is certainly partly about oil How can anyone even pretend to deny it.  It’s also about geopolitics. And about addressing domestic political embarrassments in the US. That the prices in the U.S still seem to be on the increase has been largely attributed to the uncertainty over Bush plans to attack Iran.

      “Certainly contractors can land lucrative jobs in other parts of the world without having to worry about kidnapping and decapitation.”

      That flied in the face of all evidence.  For example, prior to the Iraq war, Halliburton was on the verge of bankruptcy.  Now it is racking in record profits.  It’s true that contractors could land lucrative jobs in other parts of the world, but they would have to wait for a war to be created first.

      Wartime is huge business.  When was the last time 300 billion was spent over 3 years by the US?

      El Cid, seeing as your pat of the cheer squad for this completely unnecessary war, why don’t you sign up and show us what a real man is made of?  I was against this clustefuck from day 1, but feel free to explain to me why I should lay my life on the line to suppor it.

      Wronwright – sorry that you feel so insignificant mate.  No I am not a troll.  I am sincere in my position.  I actually have a full time job in 3D animation, so waiting for renders and simulations to be completed gives me ample time to post.  You jealous?

      Stoop Davy Dave.  I only joined a couple of days ago, so no, I am not here under a pseudonym.  I certainly look forward to exchanging ideas with you and everyone else on the list, but the credibility of an argument is not strengthened by the volume of venom you fling or how loudly you fling it. Provide some links and references and I am happy to listen. 😉

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 06:21 PM • permalink

 

    1. Incidentlyl Paco, what does the fat you have never heard from me have to do with anything exaclty?

      Are you the self appointed thought police on this forum?

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 06:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. El Cid, seeing as your pat of the cheer squad for this completely unnecessary war, why don’t you sign up and show us what a real man is made of?

      I tried…wouldn’t let me to old…but I could “sign up” for you Mr. MENSA…..:).

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 06:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. As for the “cluster fuck”, until or unless the cluster fuckers are defeated…you may still speak through your mouth…should the “cluster fuckers” win…YOU will be amazed as to how tall you are WERE…it’s the last thing you will see, before the maggots start in on your eyes.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 06:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. El Cid,

      You seem determined to get me into the military.  A tad self defeating don’t you think seeing as I am opposed to illegal military agression.  But seriouly mate, are you here just to berate anyone who shout down anyone who disagrees with you or are you at all inetrested in other people’s opinions?

      BTW.  In case you’ve been living in a cave the last 24 months, we’re losing in Iraq.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 06:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. Oh piss off Adammo-you don’t know the first fucking thing about Iraq.  By what bizzare definition do you think we are losing?  Is the enemy capable of driving us from the country militarily?  Is he capable of attacking any of our FOBs?  Can he even successfully attack one of our patrols and force them to yield the battlefield?

      I realize that you aren’t interested in anything other than a little idiotic trollery, but you have a lot of nerve demanding that other posters provide lots of “links and references” while you make all sorts of bald face assertions without providing any of your own.  Back up your assertion that we are losing in Iraq-hell even define what victory for the enemy would look like.

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 04 28 at 06:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. Ah, Mr Addamo.  We at “FrootLoopCare.com” (NASAQ: FLCA) value your business.

      We appreciate that, having escaped from your care facility you crave attention – but I’m sorry to say we cannot accept your application as it is.  First, we don’t offer a “two for the price of one” deal, so you will have to remove your head from Mr Fisk’s anus and either come in separately or send Mr “Lucid and Clear” away (so he can sober up).  No, a daisy chain is NOT OK.  Be sensible please.

      Professionally, we obviously agree completely with your thought processes, but I’m afraid your entire lexicon:
      The War’s About Oil (TM);
      Haliburton is Evil (TM);
      The War is Unnecessary (TM);
      Wartime is Huge Business (TM);
      Bush Plans to Attack Iran (TM); and
      Reconstruction is a Failure (TM)

      ….is, as you can see, entirely trademarked to “FruitLoopCare.com” (NASDAQ: FCLA) so can you try to come up with something more original?

      OK, they are the 2 biggest issues to deal with before we take you on.  Ah, I see Mr “Lucid and Clear” has retired to the bar, so that’s one fixed.  He has spent over 20 years in the Middle East, you know.

      So, can you come up with something original without Fisking so we can do business?

      Oh, that reminds me.  You really shouldn’t mention here what you do, especially the bit about rendering and simulation.  Please.  It just makes everyone else here sooooo jealous!  And MrLeftyLatteLover – that’s him over there in the rubber suit holding a jar of banana yoghurt – wants to talk to you.

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 28 at 06:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. How dare you use the term “we’re”…. seeing as I am opposed to illegal military agression (sic), remember…You can’t be a “we’re”, in this case You are a you, all by your lonesome WELL, you and the other Left wingers that ‘think’ (oxymoronic, I know)‘they’ can reason with these Islamapsychotics…good luck, should ‘they’ win. As I mentioned, you will be amazed at how tall you were…:).

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 06:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. Fair enough 91B30. You make a reasonable argument.

      Perhaps if we agree on what victory entails, we could start to debate this issue.

      So what did we go to Iraq to do?

      1. Find WMD – there weren’t any
      2. Kick Al Qaeda’s but – they weren’t there but followed us into Iraq
      3. Being an end to the brutality of Saddam – we did and are reapplying our own brand
      4. Bring freedom and democracy to Iraq – work in progress, but failing miserably so far
      5. Fight the ear on terror – this week is was announced that terror acctakcs are at an all time high oooops
      6. Bring security to the region – last week it was reported that the Coalition was gearing up to re-take Baghdad.  How many times has it been?
      7. Get rid of Saddam – success.

      Hey, one out of 7 ain’t bad, but that doeesnt; soudn liek much of a victory.

      Of course, if you define victory by the number of Iraqis we can kill, and the sice of the bases and embassy we are building then sure, we have victory with a capital V.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 07:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey El Cid,

      The Islamapsychotics were in Afghanistan remember? Of course I;m using the term we’re in jest.  My bad.

      And in case you hadn’t noticed, this war is abotu as popular as cott death, which makes people like you a great deal more lonesome than me.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 07:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo

      Last one to ya’, mate. You ain’t seen the football, since the kick off.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 07:07 PM • permalink

 

    1. Trolls always seem to insist upon their facts, and assert arguments based on assumptions not proven. Easy to spot.

      Let’s count them:
      1) Losing in Iraq. (Based on your experience in Iraq? Didn’t think so.)
      2) Illegal military agression. (Probably too young to know about Gulf War cease fire violations and UN resolution non-compliance. Try a history lesson, perhaps law school, too.)
      3) War is huge. When was last time $300 billion was spent over 3 years? (Try Medicare every year—if you’re looking for big business.)
      4) Halliburton was on the verge of bankruptcy. (Now you’re just making it up as you go along. Recommend you stay away from the market as financial statements are beyong your realm.)
      5)Statistics gathered from Saudi Arabia…(Mailing it in I see…time for hip waders.)
      6)Percentage of foreign fighters is insignificant. (Perhaps, but the number of dead foreign fighters is significant.)

      All I can say is that you distinguish yourself solely by the lack of all caps in the power of your pixelated assertions.

      And to answer your last question to El Cid, opinions are like assholes, you’re just another one.

      Cheers.

      Posted by Forbes on 2006 04 28 at 07:17 PM • permalink

 

    1. Stop Continental Drift!

      Great post.  OK. First things first.

      Does my disagreeing with the conventinal wisdom as degined by this foum make me a troll?  Just want to knwo what rules to play by here.

      Stop Continental Drift!

      Great post.  OK. First things first.

      Does my disagreeing with the conventional wisdom as deigned by this forum, make me a troll?  Just want to know what rules to play by here.
      Sorry that you are so utterly bored with my repeating the obvious, but as you may have guessed, there are more than a handful of people on the list who don’t seem to have come to terms with the basics.
      As for my vocation, someone alluded to my being an out of work student with to much time on his hands. Thought I’d put things in perspective.
      I am not particularly interested in dueling with anyone so much as sharing ideas.  No doubt you could bitch slap me if we were to partake in exchanging insults,  without much effort, if you’re into that kind of thing.
      But mate, seriously, is it so hard to actually post something here without making some creatively derogatory remark about anyone, to is there some male rights of passage requirement to take part?

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 07:18 PM • permalink

 

    1. Ah, Mr BlackAddermo.  We at “FrootLoopCare.com” (NASAQ: FLCA) value your business.

      We are so pleased that you have moved on from your initial silly statements about Mr Zarqawi (”Zarqawi is what, a one legged man with more lives than a cat and who seems to cop the blame for everything that goes wrong in Iraq.  He is only of consequence because the Bush administration needed a Bin Laden facsimile to rally the public.”).  Obviously came about by your, er intimate association with Mr Lucid and Clear.

      Now your arguments are much simpler to deal with and we have decided to put you in the same care group as Mr LeftyLatteLover – you met him earlier.  Sorry about that accident with the bottle of banana yoghurt.  You’ll pass it naturally soon enough.

      Your writings are so very similar to Mr LLL, who came to our attention a few weeks ago, its eerie.

      So the same treatment.  Put this rubber suit on – oh, you’ve brought your own?  Good.  Go with MrLLL and he’ll show you how to fill up the jar without taking the suit off.

      Now, keep writing and tell us ALL your fantasies.  Simulation nearly finished?

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 28 at 07:21 PM • permalink

 

    1. You’ve made a lot of claims that we are losing Adammo-reference some of them.  All those announcements you alluded to in post 63 ought to have a source.

      Here’s a couple for perspective.

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 04 28 at 07:24 PM • permalink

 

    1. SCDrifty: Thanks for the reminder. MO does sound like the lesbianleftylover, or whomever that flake was. Must remember to stop feeding the trolls. Good luck with the rubber rooms!

      Posted by Forbes on 2006 04 28 at 07:28 PM • permalink

 

    1. Forbes,

      Thanks for the heads up.

      A couple of points you might want to revisit.

      1) Losing in Iraq. (Based on your experience in Iraq? Didn’t think so.)

      A: Based on what the coalition set out to achieve.  Perhaps failure is a better term. Point taken.

      2) Illegal military agression. (Probably too young to know about Gulf War cease fire violations and UN resolution non-compliance. Try a history lesson, perhaps law school, too.)

      A: Which is why Blair had to twist Goldsmith’s arms to come up with a legal precedent.

      Actually I was probably older than you during Gulf War 1.  The war was not executed because of cease fire violations, or UN non compliance.  No UNSC resolution were passed to authorize military action and none of the resolutions included a trigger for military intervention.  Law school indeed.

      3) War is huge. When was last time $300 billion was spent over 3 years? (Try Medicare every year—if you’re looking for big business.)

      Except that Medicare is not budgeted at $50 billion to begin with, nor are the costs expected to be offset by oil revenues that never eventuate.

      4) Halliburton was on the verge of bankruptcy. (Now you’re just making it up as you go along. Recommend you stay away from the market as financial statements are beyond your realm.)

      So tell me oh wise one, do you have evidence to the contrary?

      6)Percentage of foreign fighters is insignificant. (Perhaps, but the number of dead foreign fighters is significant.)

      Meaning what exactly?  Was the purpose of the Iraq war to go into the ME, piss off enough Arabs so that they would take up arms and come after us, then kill them?

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 07:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hmmmmmmm….

      States opinions and assertions as facts.  Check

      Cherry picks answers.  Check

      Offers list of talking points eerily similar to leftie talking points.  Check

      Ignores facts and opinions from other (experienced) sources that might conflict with pre-conceived notions.  Check

      Obtuse, deliberately or natural.  Check

      Attempting to dominate/hijack the thread (i.e., from “Fisk is an idiot” to “Lookit me, I knows all about Iraq, I do!!!”).  Check

      Yup.  Addamo is a leftie troll.  And not original either.  Oh, well…

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 07:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. The_Real_JeffS

      I enjoyed your post.  Thanks for the information.  Contrary to your assumption. I am more than interested in any information that comes my way.
      Needless to say, I appreciate you sharing your experience and knowledge of the details

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 07:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. No, Adumbo, paco isn’t the self-appointed thought police for this forum; it is my understanding that paco is a duly elected policer of thought, second only to Andrea, who is second only to Tim.  Or something like that.  You might give some censideration to policing your own thinking.  Facts first, then reason.  But you must look at all the facts and not rush to judgment.

      You ought to be ashamed of yourself. The stuff you’re spewing is so old, and has been debunked so many times, that you are in terrible danger of boring your intended audience.  At the very least, boring your audience is ill-mannered.

      P.S.  Don’t bother answering.  You didn’t bother to answer about how the Turks managed to place themselves between the Kurds and the Sunnis without a peep from the Iraqis or the coalition forces.  A pretended interest in rational discourse is not the same thing as a rational discourse.  I’m old enough to know the difference, and wise enough not to waste my time with someone who indulges in the former.

      P.S.S.  Sorry for butting in paco.  I know you are perfectly able to have a go, if you’re of a mind to.  It was the gratuitous sneer; I’m pig-sick (much sicker than any other kind of sick) of the gratuitous sneers.

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 28 at 07:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. Ah, Mr BlackAddermo.  We at “FrootLoopCare.com” (NASAQ: FLCA) value your business.

      And we are making good progress now.

      But mate, seriously, is it so hard to actually post something here without making some creatively derogatory remark about anyone, to is there some male rights of passage requirement to take part?

      As you can obviously handle the truth (er, between simulations?) I can now let you in on the master secret of this blog.  I am not making the following up… have a scan through a number of previous threads and you’ll soon see what I mean.

      There are a few people who post here – they will remain nameless (for now) – who are the minions and henchmen of the Evil Lord Rove and who go all over the world – and the universe – doing his bidding.  For instance Wron  (oops nearly slipped there) is in charge of the Tardis and has a weakness for Samerian meade.  Stoopy has a penchant for wearing goat suits and personally inconvenienced Robert Magube.

      But the one you really want to look out for is our Administratrix.  Think leather thigh boots, a diamond tiara, a spear and bow & arrows.  (Shivers).

      So now you know.

      We are worried about your repeating yourself, though.  That may mean another round of treatment with Mr LeftyLatteLover, this time with him reading aloud from Bob Brown’s latest book.

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 28 at 07:39 PM • permalink

 

    1. 91B30

      I will take back the term losing, so perhaps we will settle for monumental failure.  How’s that sound?

      As for links:

      1.Failure to find WM: A matter of record.
      2.Kick Al Qaeda’s but.  Al Qaeda’s absence on Iraq prior to 2003 is a matter of record.
      3.Being an end to the brutality of Saddam: The Baghdad mortuary has reported receiving between 60 and 85 bodies a day.
      members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1145037248.html
      4.Bring freedom and democracy to Iraq: With civil war on the horizon, there wont be any freedom and democracy in the foreseeable future.
      5.Fight the war on terror: Worldwide Terror Attacks Exceed 10,000
      http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/04/21/national/w121227D22.DTL
      6. Bring security to the region:  The US is considering applying the Fallujah option to Baghdad.  http://context.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2006/04/14/120.html

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 07:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo
      “Statistics gathered from Saudi Arabia of captured fighters had concluded that the majority of those joining the fight are otherwise moderate Muslims radicalized by the presence of the occupying forces in Iraq.”

      Hahahahahaha, riiight. Perfectly normal rational sane people, made the decision to leave their place of employment, family and everything behind because they are NOT fanatics?
      How many Bosnian Christians have been caught in Indonesia fighting for a Christian theocracy?
      How many hindus in Sri Lamka?
      How many Italians in Darfur?
      It is a patholology of hate, that runs through 1 society, 1 religon, that attempts to subvert others to a 8th century Theocracy. (Hint: its not the mormons)

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 28 at 07:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. Is it just me, or has this guy just pulled LLL’s old bait and switch tactic:  attack first (go for creds/get respect), then ask if we can’t just all get along?

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 28 at 07:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. saltydog

      No doubt the pints I raised are old news, but I ma not pretending to entertain anyone.

      Your assertion about my points being debunked maybe or may not have any grounds.  You’ll have to excuse my newness to the forum.

      Having said that, it’s still news to some eon this list that the US military and Pentagon hyped Zarqawi’s importance to the Iraq conflict, and even doctored his conrrespondence.

      “You didn’t bother to answer about how the Turks managed to place themselves between the Kurds and the Sunnis without a peep from the Iraqis or the coalition forces.”

      Perhaps I missed the post but I was not aware such a question was asked of me.

      Perhaps you might explain then why Rice is trying to keep the Turks, amasses on the Southern Border of Kurdistan not to go after the PKK,while the Iranis wait at the other end.

      You are entitled to your assumptions about my motives, but you are indeed wasting your time.  I am indeed interested in rational discourse, but so it gets some getting used to sifting through the layers of condesending posts, to some up with pearls to enter into such rational exchanges.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 08:00 PM • permalink

 

    1. The “rite of passage” to which you refer is simple enough, really:

      Begin the process with a serious and thorough review and accumulation of data/relevant facts. Be sure to always capture your citations, preferably those both for and against your position, particularly where the Internet is involved.
      Compose your argument in conclusions/premise format BEFORE you post. This is very important as a thread will evolve very quickly and you may find you have painted yourself into a corner from which it will be difficult to escape with any semblance of dignity.

      A simple, yet effective, test of whether or not your post is “flowing” is to understand your audience and take their analysis on board before responding precipitously. If they cannot follow your logic, then it is likely that you will have to return to step 1.

      Focus on fully supporting your assertions through a strong and reasonably broad sample of citations. Please be sure to cite where you use your sources in DIRECT relation to the assertions or opinions you post.

      However painful it may be to yourself, try to present all sides of an issue in a fair, unbiased way. You are then free to form your own critically-derived conclusion on the weight of the evidence that you have found and presented and, by extension, be better able to defend them.

      I find it very useful to try to reduce potential premises, and (sub)conclusions to a few words capturing the key thought, and then to look for redundancy among the potential premises, and (sub)conclusions. Once the key thoughts are recognized, then they can be organized into a charitable interpretation of the post that also captures the “flow” of the thread as a whole. (This is the opposite of “thread-highjacking)

      If you would like further advice I would be happy to provide.

      Of course, you could simply use the time-honoured (and equally effective) instrumentality of “first impulse” and tell me to take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 28 at 08:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. Contrary to your assumption. I am more than interested in any information that comes my way.

      saltydog, you are spot on with the bait-and-switch.  Addamo spewed forth incredible idiocy on his Iraq construction comments.  Thing is, such facts are easily attainable via Google.
      That he couldn’t avail himself of this avenue tells me he isn’t interested in facts.  He wants attention.

      Thus, his oh-so-polite response to me is exactly what you point out.  A thread hijacking technique.

      Nuts to him; he’s just another silly troll.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 28 at 09:29 PM • permalink

 

    1. #21 MentalFloss

      ..I will personally go to the frontline..

      This is a concern, people willing to be involved in fighting not sanctioned by Australia, in my opinion are dangerous.
      There is no line between that behaviour and those who see their particular call to arms being located within our shores.

      Posted by galoot on 2006 04 28 at 09:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. Greg Sheridan at his best on the problem of ‘our ABC’:
      “On those occasions when the ABC does allow a debate, Jones will often signal to the audience who is the designated good guy with a kind of oleaginous sycophancy while spitting venom and contempt at the bad guy”.

      I know only one ABC program that doesn’t do that:
      Monday 4pm’s Counterpoint – the single sop thrown to people who actually want to think fairly and professionally.

      Adamski is talking about old age, tablets and Zimmer frames -let’s hope he isn’t kidding.

      Posted by Barrie on 2006 04 28 at 09:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. So your argument consists of:
      1)some message board (for which I got a 404 error) which states that the Baghdad mortuary recieves 60-85 bodies a day.  Now, see that doesn’t say 60-85 killed in fighting a day and a big city and Baghdad is a pretty big city-6.4 million-so who knows how many natural deaths they have a day and I assume that many of them would go to the morgue as well.  Meanwhile Saddam killed 100,000 kurds in just one operation.  So I guess your claim that we are replacing his butchery with our own would not get a sympathetic response from many Iraqis.

      2) an op-ed from a Moscow paper which is ranting about PNAC (JOOOOOOOS!!!!)

      3) an article from the Frisco paper which notes that we are doing a better job of accounting for terrorist acts in Nepal (which I am sure involves dark Rovian forces somehow-perhaps Wronwright will fill us in after he chases down the hidden Imam).

      Adammo-the definition of war is “a series of catastrophes that results in victory.” — Georges Clemenceau

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 04 28 at 09:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. Ah, Mr BlackAddermo.  We at “FrootLoopCare.com” (NASAQ: FLCA) value your business.

      But we are not amused.  When you arrived, with your description of Mr Fisk as “Lucid and Clear” we thought you a classic case of Chattering Class Syndrome and began treatment accordingly (begining with a rectal extraction of your noggin).

      But after just 2 sessions with Mr Lefty Latte Lover, the rubber suits and readings from Senator Bob Brown-eye, you start saying things like:

      I am more than interested in any information that comes my way.

      and

      I am indeed interested in rational discourse,

      You have misled us.  Your affiliations aren’t Fiskian, they are Self Importance.  You are in the wrong place.  You need a place with Serious Dialogue So You Can Have an Informed Debate.  Where People Deal in Facts.  Where People Are as Important and as Well Informed as You Are.

      You need

      Magrok Kingston’s Web Diary

      Please tell them we sent you, as we get paid for referrals.  Please pay our receptionist on your way out.  All funds in FrootLoopCare.com’s control goes to evil right-wing conspiracies, such as starving poor African children, stealing the world’s oil, destroying the environment and generally invading any country passing by.  Anything left over we invest in Haliburton stock.  Ker-ching!

      Have a nice day.

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 28 at 09:48 PM • permalink

 

    1. #56: I think you’re confusing me with Wronwright (I was quoting him).

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 28 at 09:48 PM • permalink

 

    1. Stop Continental Drift!

      Now thats just being cruel…

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 28 at 09:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. Saltydog: Thanks for getting my back, mate!

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 28 at 09:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. It’s LLL all over again.  *sigh*  He must enjoy this game because he sure does it a lot.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 28 at 09:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. The_Real_JeffS

      You are seriously exhibiting some paranoid symptoms.  By your own statement, you provided first hand experience.  It would be foolish of me to dispute what you have to say.  That you consider the specifics of what you posted to be common knowledge is a tad presumptuous.

      But perhaps you it sits better with you to elieve that I am lurking, motivated by sinister motives.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 09:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. Stop Continental Drift!

      What is it with this WE business anyway.  When I joined the forum, nowhere did it say anything about being assimilated into the BORG.  It’s pretty macabre to contemplate a groups residing on a BLOG that exists and speaks with one voice.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. 91B30

      “Meanwhile Saddam killed 100,000 kurds in just one operation”

      Your source mentions that Saddam killed 125 people a day.

      Based on Iraqi Body Count (which plainly states it purposely underestimates the number of deaths) the number is close to 40 per day.
      Based on the Lancet, the deaths since the invasion stands at 140 per day.

      And before you predictably use the ad hominem that the Lancet has been discredit, consider that IRB includes a handful of deaths from aerial bombardment, when in fact the US dropped something like 2 million munitions (i.e. 500 pound bombs) on Iraq in the first 18 months of conflict.  That comes to more that 2 every minute 24/7.

      Perhaps you’ll argue that none of these were targeted at Iraqi human targets, but then again…

      “2) an op-ed from a Moscow paper which is ranting about PNAC (JOOOOOOOS!!!!)”
      So it must be wrong then?  PNAC is just as myth concocted by the left right?

      “Adammo-the definition of war is “a series of catastrophes that results in victory.” — Georges Clemenceau “

      Do me the favor of explaining what a victory, by your definition.  Victory means success does it not?

      BTW.  As far as the war on terror goes, someone in the know seems to believe we are losing.

      http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=16335

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo
      I think you find a variety of opinions on this site, the problem you have is that you are touching on a point where most people here have a fairly set view.
      Nearly everyone here thinks Saddam should have been overthrown.
      Nearly everyone here believes leaving a man who has used chemical munitions on his own people in power would be a little silly.
      Nearly everyone believes the sanctions on Iraq did as close to nothing to loosen his grip on power.
      Nearly noone believed that Iraq would become a fully functional democracy overnight.
      Nearly everybody here believes Syria, Iran, ect are actively funding and facilitating the terrorists within Iraq.

      Not sure why Im bothering communicating with a troll though…

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 28 at 10:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. BTW. 91B30

      As far as the Baghdad morgue story goes, here is a better source.

      ” The morgue is receiving a minimum of 60 bodies a day and sometimes more than 100, a morgue employee told IPS on condition of anonymity.

      “The average is probably over 85,” said the employee on the morning of April 12, as scores of family members waited outside the building to see if their loved ones were among the dead. “

      http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32896

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:17 PM • permalink

 

    1. thefrollickingmole,

      Fair comments.  And to be frank, I have no disagreement with any of those points.

      Your third point is proably the issue that is as the heart of this.  The US helped draft the resolutions in 1991 that demanded Iraq be disarmed, but made no mention of regime change.

      Then that same year, Bush and Baker both stated that the sanctions would remain inplace so long as Saddam was in power. These guys were evidently too gutless to lay their cards on the table when they had the oportunity.  Consequently, a million Iraqis died as a result of the sanctions and to reward the Iraqis for their hardship, the US gave them Shock and Awe.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. Agreed Addamo – it would certainly be foolish to dispute The_Real_JeffS first hand knowledge and experience.  Just as it would be incredibly foolish to make this assertion in the first place, as if it was indisputable fact:

      The allied effort in Iraq has managed to achieve the construction of the worlds largest military base (Camp Victory), and the worlds largest Embassy in Baghdad, while reconstruction efforts never got out of neutral.  The budget for Camp Victory was more than the entire budget set aside for Iraq’s reconstruction, (ie. the rebuilding of what the occupation blew up), and even that has been chewed up my security firms.  The US contractors that are making financial windfalls and hiring foreign workers, while Iraqis struggle to live.

      Let’s face it Addamo, you were just sprouting rubbish – things that you simply asserted because they “ought” to be true according to your established world-view, with no regard to their basis in actual fact.  In simpler words, you are making it up as you go.

      As for “common knowledge”, the facts are easily obtainable by those who have a genuine interest, which includes quite a few people who visit Tim’s blog regularly.  All you need is the willingness to track down realsources and keep an open mind – ie one not already dedicated to some pre-conceived agenda.

      As for most of the discussion on this blog, I post very rarely but I more often enjoy peeking in on some of the comments threads.  These buggers make me laugh and occasionally make a good point.  I don’t think many of us are really interested in “debating” self-important lefty bores, even if you really were interested in “rational discussion”, as you claim.  Go and join a debating society or – maybe better – make the acquaintance of some of the many thousands of refugees in this country who fled Saddam’s Iraq.

      Posted by TFK on 2006 04 28 at 10:31 PM • permalink

 

    1. MentalFloss,

      Your words of wisdon and advice are most appreciated and I will certainly take them on board.

      Many thanks.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. Going back to where we were before Addamo hijacked the attention of a good number of regular commenters …

      Amazing to hear another of our visiting “educators” boasting about how they “get it” when listening to Fisk!  All I see is Fisk’s obvious psychological and mental deterioration progressing.  It really is getting beyond the frankly pathological.  I do not think this is substance abuse but, if it is, it sure ain’t grog.  Maybe speed or something.  As I have said before, I suspect that Fisk suffers from a bipolar disorder and has been showing symptoms of acute psychosis recently.

      No thinking person on the centre-right of politics has ever blamed Zarqari for the whole Iraqi Sunni insurgency.  However, his “Al-Qaida in Iraq” group has been responsible for the bulk of suicide bombings and the most shameful examples of mass slaughter of (mainly Shiite) civilians.

      There is no possibility of achieving a resolution with the Jihadist elements of the insurgency, while there is every chance of drawing disaffected local Sunni and nationalist elements into the emerging Iraqi political process.  The strategic importance of this for the future of Iraq cannot be over-emphasised.

      That is the basis of the media strategy in Iraq and it is a perfectly valid and necessary course of action at present.

      Coalition and Interim Government leaders have tried to use the media to achieve these ends – big surprise, hey?  It doesn’t mean that the media in Iraq is not more genuinely free now than virtually anywhere else in the Middle East.  Anyone who actually cares enough about Iraq to inform themselves can see that the media there is real “let a thousand flowers grow” stuff at the moment.

      Zarqari doesn’t need much in the way of vilification.  His group and the Jihadists around him stand utterly condemned by their own actions and their own public statements.  Our lefty trolls would be well-advised to study Zarqari’s own words – particularly his views on the place of Shiites and Kurds, who form the vast bulk of the population of the nation we are seeing reborn.

      Posted by TFK on 2006 04 28 at 10:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. #91 BlackAddermo:  What is it with this WE business anyway.

      Ah, Mr BlackAddermo.  We at “FrootLoopCare.com” (NASAQ: FLCA) value your business (even though we have closed your account, so sorry).

      The “we” of course refers to all the good folks at “FrootLoopCare.com”.

      Now be a good lad and move along, now.  Those very nice people at WebDiary are much more capable of dealing with some-one of your intellect and grasp of geopolitical strategy and dynamics.

      Gosh, is that the time?  Those renderings and simulations seem to take ages, don’t they? Computers have moved on from the good ‘ol 486 so if you want those simulation thingys to go a bit faster, you should upgrade.

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 28 at 10:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. Adammo-victory means ultimate success.  By which I mean that we will have any number of setbacks along the way.  Nonetheless, signs of victory are apparent to those who care to look for them and are as I previously stated: we are offering battle to our enemies on a field of our own choosing.  We are forcing him to fight us in Iraq rather than bunkering up and waiting for him to carry the attack to us.  And he is forced to respond to us given that the pressure is now on him to “liberate” a muslim homeland from “crusaders”.

      Frankly, I see no evidence that the enemy is more committed to attacking us now than previously save that he is doing so against soldiers who can defend themselves in Iraq, rather than against civilians in New York, D.C. and Pennsylvania.  If the jihadis want martyrdom, let the Army and Marines give it to them. The “why do they hate us” meme is tiresome-their reasons are their own, if it weren’t Iraq it would be Israel, if not Israel it would be our corrupt western lifestyles (which they can’t get enough of on satellite TV) or God only knows what.  They’ve shown that they hardly need an excuse to carry out terrorism and they are only too willing to bring up forgotten (for those of us in the West anyway) battles or slights as justification if need be (Osamma does it constantly ranting about Andalucia or the loss of the Caliphate).

      Every day Iraqi forces get stronger (vis the link I posted earlier about them killing over 20 insurgents-including a key al Qaeda leader-and capturing over 40 more.

      You still don’t address the point that the numbers of bodies at the Baghdad morgue mean nothing in and of themselves.  And BTW pointing out that a study has been debunked is not ad hominem.  Saying Adammo has dog turds for brains is ad hominem-that’s right out of logical fallacies 101.  The Lancet gave a confidence range that was laughable for its estimates (something like 95% certainty that the number of deaths was between 5,000 and 100,000).  And even if the Iraq Body Count doubled its estimates to 80 a day there would still be more net Iraqis alive as compared to Saddam’s days (especially given the fact that the “insugents” are doing a lot more of the killing than we are).

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 04 28 at 10:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. TFK,

      While I stand corrected on the Iraqi reconstruction effort, I did not make it up as I went along.  If I gardened those opinions from dubious sources, then fair enough, but I would not be so foolish as to invent something about a land or situation I have not personally experienced.

      Zarqawi is unquestionably responsible for a great deal of carnage in Iraq, which makes Bush’s decision not to take him out (when he had the opportunity http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/) all the more abhorrent.

      Given the activities of the death squads, operating out of the interior ministry, it seems increasingly unlikely that those in power are serious about including the Sunni population into he political process.  Until the occupation puts an end to these activities, the process is bound to fail.

      Zarqawi’s diatribes are what they are. As far as his recent video production, Zarqawi was presumably very reticent and careful about making his physical identification as difficult as possible (which makes sense when you have 25 million dollars reward on your butt), but suddenly the guy decides to become a media star.

      Hard to believe Bush’s Nixonian approval ratings had nothing to do with it.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 10:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. TFK

      These buggers make me laugh and occasionally make a good point.  I don’t think many of us are really interested in “debating” self-important lefty bores

      Spot on TFK (although I believe (most) posters here make many good points) BUT without T.B. taking umbrage, this is a virtual pub owned by Mr. Blair, and his place is a gathering of like minded individuals, who/whom air the ‘days news’ in their own words, with their own thoughts, in their own way….and raise a brew or two.

      BTW, Tim is an excellent pub owner and makes this a very comfortable place.

      As to this…Ex-CIA analyst says US policies in Islamic world have given boost to Al-Qaeda and its leaders.

      Michael Scheuer, who led the bin Laden unit from 1996-1999.

      Very successful at his job, wasn’t he? God knows how many times Mr. Michael Scheuer, while heading the “bin Laden” unit, captured Mr. bin Laden.

      “Time is not on America’s side. We’re clearly losing,” Scheuer told a government security conference in Washington.

      Seems mighty proud of his failures.

      “We’re at a point where Al-Qaeda and bin Laden are changing into Al-Qaedism and bin Ladenism – a philosophy and a movement rather than a man and an organization”

      Wonderful…there is nothing better then defeating, another ISM, is there?

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 11:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.
      Just exactly when did Leftists want the war to start?

      But there was absolutely no connection, between al Qaeda and Iraq.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 11:11 PM • permalink

 

    1. 1.Failure to find WM: A matter of record.

      Saddam acted like he had them. His own generals thought he had them. He had them at one point. And they may very well be in Syria. Those are also “matters of record.”

      2.Kick Al Qaeda’s but.  Al Qaeda’s absence on Iraq prior to 2003 is a matter of record.

      “Kick Al Qaeda’s but [sic]” was never an objective. Fighting terrorism and its supporters is. Saddam qualified. That’s a matter of record.

      3.Being an end to the brutality of Saddam: The Baghdad mortuary has reported receiving between 60 and 85 bodies a day.

      Is that more or less than during Saddam’s reign? What is the comparison number? Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. Oh, and BTW, Saddam used mass graves. Not mortuaries. See?

      4.Bring freedom and democracy to Iraq: With civil war on the horizon, there wont be any freedom and democracy in the foreseeable future.

      Rather conditional, yes? Are we psychic?

      5.Fight the war on terror: Worldwide Terror Attacks Exceed 10,000

      So what is that number compared to? Is it less, or more, than in previous years? Again – sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. From the very link you supplied:

      “Officials cautioned against reading too much into the overall total. The government last year adopted a new definition of terrorism and changed its system of counting global attacks”

      Did you even read that?

      I find that you lefties have a real problem with logic, with reading comprehension, and with data analysis. And I’m talking really, really simple stuff. That makes you rather gullible and credulous, don’t you think? I mean, if traffic deaths dropped from 30,000 in 2005 with a 55 MPH speed limit to 15,000 in 2006 with a 65 MPH speed limit, and the insurance companies wanted to get the speed limit LOWERED, they’d just have to post to a lefty site, “Speed Kills: 15,000 Dead in Traffic Accidents Since Speed Limit Raised to 65.” You’d all cut & paste it and post it everywhere with WHY WONT TEH GOVT DO SOMETHING?!?! in the header.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 28 at 11:11 PM • permalink

 

    1. 91B30

      I knew sooner or later, the lame argument about Iraq and 911 would come about. Behind all that sophistry and layers of venom lies a very simplistic ideology.  What a disappointment!  The enemies we have created were not of our own choosing,  That you are even buying into this long since debunked lie is pretty sad really.

      Iraq was no threat to anyone.  The fact that the place was empty in 2003 confirmed this.  Even as we speak, I am watching Bush prance, wince, flinch and cackle across America and I can come to only one conclusion. I have never witnessed a bigger cock-up in my life.  This is what, his 6th tour of the US to explain to people what the war was all about?
      The premise that we are fighting them there, rather than fighting them here is seriously scraping the bottom of the barrel.

      It assumes that a) Iraqi lives are expendable seeing as we are using their country to host the slaughter and b) that we are using coalition troops as bait.  Is you’re happy with that premise, then good luck to you.

      You are evidently more than prepared to trivialize the sense of injustice that pervades the Middle East, contrary to the opinions of experts on the field like Michael Sheur.  Evidently such evidence doesn’t fit into your narrow premise , so you chosoe to cast it aside.  A US warship blows up Iranian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, but hey! who gives a rat ass about 290 Iranians civilians here, 150,000 Iraqis there etc….Nothing but numbers, data. Coalition deaths on the other hand are real corpses, they even smell better and do not go through putrefaction process, because we talk and talk about them, but never see them…

      Your summation of the Lancet study is also off the mark.  Les Robert stated quite clearly that there was a 95% certainty that the number was above 100,000 and as high as 200,000.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 11:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. I just noticed that Adammo, after being told about it twice, has once again spoken in dire terms of Turkey “amassing” on the “Southern border of Kurdistan.”

      I may be just me, but if I wanted to be taken seriously, I would get my facts straight. To wit:

      In order for Turkish forces to “amass on the southern border of Kurdistan”, they would have to:
      1.  Parachute in;
      2.  Come in through the mountain passes and march/motor through the middle of Kurdistan (this means there would have already been huge battles, which we would have heard about);
      3.  March/motor through Syria and or Iran, cutting into the heart of Iraq from the East and the West.  All of this without anyone doing anything about it.  All of this without it being the number one story in every media outlet in the world.

      Take a look at a map.  Kurdistan takes up northern Iraq, and parts of Turkey and Iran.  Turkey may be massing troops.  They may even be threatening northern Iraq.  No surprise here, since they’ve been poking and prodding since we invaded.  They were even caught within Iraqi borders more than once.

      It’s war!  Now everybody run around frantically in circles and act surprised that war is messy.  But no matter how chaotic war becomes, the lay of the land doesn’t suddenly shift so that an army can invade and amass in the middle of the country without anybody noticing.  I think that if they had done so, we’d wouldn’t be hearing anything from Secretary Rice, but a lot from Secretary Rumsfield.

      And Adammo, you’ve become too polite now.  Reminds me of someone.

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 28 at 11:24 PM • permalink

 

    1. #82 Galoot,

      I do not require the sanction of any government to fight for what is right.

      Throughout history people of honour have offered their services, in whatever capacity, to causes they felt were worthy.

      You intimate that I would be acting as a terrorist or guerilla. The circumstances here are quite different.

      No one asked Americans to fight in the RAF before Pearl Harbour—yet many fought and died despite their country not being at war.

      The same applies to the Lafayette Escadrille in WW1.

      If you are content to sit back and watch history unfold to an evil and inhuman end, so be it.

      I would, and will, do otherwise.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 28 at 11:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Very successful at his job, wasn’t he? God knows how many times Mr. Michael Scheuer, while heading the “bin Laden” unit, captured Mr. bin Laden.”

      Let’s see, Sheur was head of the Bin Landen unit for what, 6 years? With a team of how many?  Bush, with every US asset at his disposal, has had since 911,what? Four and a half years?

      “Saddam acted like he had them. His own generals thought he had them. He had them at one point. And they may very well be in Syria. Those are also “matters of record.””

      Who gives a damn what Saddam was acting like or what his generals thought.

      In February 24 2001 and in May 15 2001, Powell stated that Saddam Hussein had not been able to “build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction” for “the last 10 years”. America, he said, had been successful in keeping him “in a box”.

      Furthermore, Tyler Drumheller’s revelations last week put the WMD argument to bed.
      ““Kick Al Qaeda’s but [sic]” was never an objective. Fighting terrorism and its supporters is. Saddam qualified. That’s a matter of record.”

      Saddam paid the families of Palestinian suicide bombers money.  The US is financing a group Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK ) which is listed by the State department as a Terrorist organization.

      “So what is that number compared to? Is it less, or more, than in previous years?”

      Try reading the link.  Yes, it has gone up significantly from 2004.

      “In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.”

      The key is Northern Iraq. This was beyond Saddam’s reach and directly under the no fly zones.  And after the US military drew up plans to bomb this camp, what sis the Bush administration do?  The logical thing of course.  Leave it be so that they could use it’s existence to bolster the case for war. Ooooooooops

      http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 11:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo, w.r.t. your entry #79, some further observations on style:

      Language (syntax, spelling, grammar) as well as a rudimentary knowledge of geography are also helpful:

      “amasses” – amasses what? Perhaps you meant “masses”

      “Southern Border of Kurdistan”—that would put the Turks smack in the middle of Iraq, now wouldn’t it?

      “Iranis wait at the other end”—now which end would that be? And who, pray tell, are Iranis and what would be accomplished by their intervention (bearing in mind that Northern Iran is largely Kurdish, with an ethnic Kurd population in excess of that in Iraq) other than unrest within their own borders?

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 28 at 11:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. Saltydog,

      Here is the link of the Turkish situation.  Perhaps it was not jsut a coincidene that Rumsfeld accompanied Rice on her trip to Iraq.

      Rice warns Turkey to keep out of Iraq
      http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/25/news/rice.php

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 11:37 PM • permalink

 

    1. Wrong again Addamo the estimates in the Lancet were between 8K and 194K, a laughable range.  And those weren’t the only problems with the study as the linked article notes.

      And frankly, I’m perfectly happy with using Iraq as both a battlefield and an object lesson.  As a battlefield it is preferable to almost anywhere else we can fignt as the desert makes it nearly impossible for our enemies to hide from our technological advantages.  As an object lesson it sends a clear message to potential supporters of terrorism that we are willing to carry the fight to them without waiting for any smoking gun as the “courtroom drama” framework pursued by the left which calls for irrefutable evidence before we act only encourages our enemies to hide their association with terrorists more effectively and then rely on team appeasement to carry their water.

      It’s also insulting that you seem to think that the jihadis are somehow passive and only react to our provocation (though it is predictable).  Osama rants about the Moors losing Spain and we are supposed to accept that as part of some “sense of injustice”.

      BTW fuckwad, you’re a presumptuous little tool.  I’ve seen more than my share of both American and Iraqi corpses-I’ve posted my particulars here plenty of times.

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 04 28 at 11:37 PM • permalink

 

    1. MentalFloss

      Agree with your earlier post concerning the Kurds…I will even at my old age, somehow, join you in the fight. I seriously doubt the Kurds will need the assistance of older trained killers…:) they seem to have plenty.

      Plenty enough to frighten the peejeebers out of several nations that exist now. Two come to mind, the Turks and the Iranians. The Kurds from what I’ve gathered and read, can be ones best friend and for sure ones worst enemy.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 11:39 PM • permalink

 

    1. ” . . .the opinions of experts on the field like Michael Sheur.” And other disaffected CIA blockheads like him, mere crutches of the “stability over all” school of tyranny apologetics.

      “I am watching Bush prance, wince, flinch and cackle across America . . .” This is mere BDS.

      “Coalition deaths on the other hand are real corpses, they even smell better and do not go through putrefaction process, because we talk and talk about them, but never see them…” Now you’re raving. All the planted lefty axioms of your earlier comments are now coming into full bloom. As to your concern over the loss of Iraqi life: how concerned were you when Sadam’s thugs were feeding people into shredders, or carrying out genocide against the Kurds?

      Posted by paco on 2006 04 28 at 11:43 PM • permalink

 

    1. Paco

      The shredder story is an interesting one.  I was of the understanding that that had been debunked.

      Of course I am appaled by Saddam’s gassing of the Kurds. What a pitty that Rummy and his boss turned a blind eye to it at the time.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 28 at 11:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. On’ya Cid!

      I didn’t think this would be a place were I was alone in thinking that there are still some things—like honour and freedom—worth fighting for.

      But you are right. The Peshmergah and the Iraqi Regulars don’t need my rifle.

      That’s why I’m going over to help run their SCADA infrastructure as soon as my papers clear.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 28 at 11:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. paco

      This viral infestation, is of the worst kind…constantly googling for answers, for doubts that previously had no questions, OR questions that previously had no doubts.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 28 at 11:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. Mental Floss

      That’s why I’m going over to help run their SCADA infrastructure as soon as my papers clear.

      Well bless you…and if you run into Texas Bob, buy him a pint or two…away from his higher ups.

      If you run out of money for brew, just leave me one of your credit cards…I’ll send more…LOL. Ummm, money, of course…:).

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 29 at 12:03 AM • permalink

 

    1. Les Robert stated quite clearly that there was a 95% certainty that the number was above 100,000 and as high as 200,000.

      That’s funny. When the Lancet study came out, with its 8000-100,000 range, Tim Blair and others wondered how high it would eventually creep up after it started making the rounds in leftie circles. Now Addamo tells us it was between 100-200K.

      Anyone want to wager how long before it’s quoted at 300,000?

      You’re sinking into a deeper swamp of dumb, Addamo.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 29 at 12:04 AM • permalink

 

    1. #115 I am appalled that you would, ham-handed, include a political jibe in the same sentence as you express your concern over the victims of Halabja.

      A jibe which, by the way, is wholly inaccurate, Rummy and his boss were not in power in 1988.

      I find you foolish and lacking in any credibilty whatever—and I am being generous by not weighing your lack of writing skill or powers of critical thinking in that measure.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 12:08 AM • permalink

 

    1. “So what is that number compared to? Is it less, or more, than in previous years?”

      Try reading the link.  Yes, it has gone up significantly from 2004.

      Why don’t YOU try reading the link, Addamo? Like this part (I’ll post it again, since you missed it when you read it and when I quoted it a few posts above):

      “Officials cautioned against reading too much into the overall total. The government last year adopted a new definition of terrorism and changed its system of counting global attacks”

      Pray tell, how do you support your claim of a “significant increase” when the units of measurement have changed.

      What part of this are you not understanding?

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 29 at 12:10 AM • permalink

 

    1. Dave S.

      Amen…and to be fair and balanced…Awomen, also.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 29 at 12:10 AM • permalink

 

    1. Folks—Addamo is a troll.  Polite and courteous, but still a troll.  And pretty stupid at that (witness all the mistakes that he makes, even after being pointed to links, or having his geography corrected).

      A suggestion: ignore him.  Addamo will keep on spewing out the same talking points, just like a belligerent troll.

      Oh, and 91B30:  you’re right.  Addamo is a presumptuous little tool and fuckwad.  He wouldn’t know an Iraqi from a Disney character.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 29 at 12:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. It’s no big deal, Senòr Cid.

      If I can do it for the State of Victoria, I can do it for anyone (by the way, I wasn’t on shift when Longford Esso blew up).

      I have an open tab at Cooper’s in Melbourne. I’ll sign it over to you, how’s that?

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 12:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. Of course I am appaled by Saddam’s gassing of the Kurds. What a pitty that Rummy and his boss turned a blind eye to it at the time.

      What a pitty [sic] Rumsfeld was still in the private sector at the time. He wasn’t SecDef until 2001.

      Yep. Deeper and deeper swamp of dumb.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 29 at 12:14 AM • permalink

 

    1. Cool, MentalFloss!  Great going!  Stay relaxed, and trust your buddies….and the soldiers protecting you.  God Bless.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 29 at 12:15 AM • permalink

 

    1. You’re right, Jeff S. The nincompoop has been gutted, filleted, and served on a toasted roll. I’m full.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 29 at 12:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. Mental Floss

      I have an open tab at Cooper’s in Melbourne. I’ll sign it over to you, how’s that?

      You’re on mate…but you have to come back in one whole piece, to sign the final papers.

      How long is the assignment of your choosing?

      Have an early T-Time, must urn in bit should you leave an answer, will find it upon my return, tomorrow U.S. time.

      Oh and remember this: There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result. 
      Sir Winston Churchill

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 29 at 12:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. Thanks Jeff-he pissed me off with his “we’re losing in Iraq” comment and I paid him more attention than he deserved.  I’m done for the night, goodnight everybody.

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 04 29 at 12:23 AM • permalink

 

    1. Six months, Cid. If I time it right, we’ll raise a few while we watch the Ashes return to Australia.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 12:45 AM • permalink

 

    1. #21 & #107 MentalFloss

      You may not require anyones sanction, but I am calling for it, on ‘Australians’ that wish to kill and fight without the agreement of our democray.

      There are plenty of Australians right here in Geelong that have murdered people, whilst passionately defending what they feel is right while on some foreign adventure.

      Such actions should be called what they are…murder. You may be noble, your chosen cause may be noble, but I dont wish to argue the case with every passionate, would be killer in Australia.

      Why travel overseas when there might be a equally passionate ‘enemy’ supporter right next door?

      Posted by galoot on 2006 04 29 at 12:54 AM • permalink

 

    1. # 130 Your argument is circular and, thrice read, unclear.

      Are you saying that if I don the uniform of another country as a legal combatant in a war other than that declared by the country in which I am resident that I become thereby a murderer?

      Are you suggesting (as it seems) that I should confine my “murder” activities to real or imagined enemies here in Geelong?

      Please clarify.

      For your information, I come from a race of folk for whom, at the time time of their direst need, none would stand up in defense or lift a finger in succor—the consequences of which haunt me and mine to this very day.

      I am no killer, but I am a man.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 01:30 AM • permalink

 

    1. Every day almost we see multitudes of threatening faces and cleched fist calling for the destuction of western culture, burning Flags and burning effigies of our leaders. They shout ‘Allah-akbar. Jihad-Jihad’ from Indonesia to london. There are MILLIONS of them and we know what they want and soon we will not be allowed to say it if the “progressives of the Eu and elsewhere are not stopped.
      To them Bin laden and the evil beheader of american kids are heroes in the vein of MO himself.
      And leftists tell us that we have failed to get Bin Laden! There are thousands of Bin Ladens out there to replace him for goodness sake.

      We are fighting a war to maintain our civilisation, culture and way of life.
      How important is FiSk in that scheme of things!

      Posted by davo on 2006 04 29 at 01:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. Galoot. I am aware of your credentials and your observation of this and other sites.

      If you are seeking to draw me out or otherwise bait me into an act of sedition, I suggest you proceed through the channels you have at your disposal.

      There is no secrecy here, as you well know, and your efforts thus far have been clumsy.

      My identity is known to you and your organisation. Should you wish to discuss this further, you know where to find me.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 01:53 AM • permalink

 

    1. MentalFloss, I have no idea what Galoot is going on about, and I don’t care.  I salute you.  You’re following in a long tradition of free men fighting against tyranny wherever it may rear its ugly head, and killing it if at all possible.  Only an immoral premise could lead to the conclusion that the fight against tyranny is evil.

      Frankly, there’s too much of that kind of thing going around these days, usually done by the gray people who snarl at you about brotherhood and love diversity and toleration, while threatening you in the name of their gray morals.

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 29 at 02:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. MentalFloss,

      P.S.  The immoral premise is two-fold:  altruism, which tells you that your life belongs to the state, the church, the mosque, any other entity but your sovereign self, and only this other entity can rightfully demand your sacrifice (i.e., you have a nerve determining how and when you will risk your life); and, weakness makes right, i.e., truth is determined by the fact of weakness.  The argument from numbers comes from this premise; you know, the Coalition has killed more people than the insurgency, or the Israelis have killed more Palestinians, etc.  Truth and Justice are not derived from the facts of reality – the behavior of the parties involved.  They both are derived from counting the bodies, checking the wallet, and determining the relative productiveness of the combatants.  Weakness is determined by failure and is in the Right by that fact.

      Colons and semi-colons within dashes and parenthetical remarks.  That’s my late-night rambling screed for tonight.

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 29 at 02:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. My god, is this still going on? No wonder none of the TO DO list I left the minions have been crossed off.

      (gives stern look in the direction of the layabouts)

      I have a feeling that Adammo is David Heidelberg and we’ve gone over these questions more times than we care to remember.  But I’ll take the bait.

      Adammo, what you didn’t seem to list is:
      1.  no 9/11 attack in US or other Western nation—you might not place any value on that but we certainly do
      2.  no detonation of a WMD in a Western city—that was the ultimate reason for the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq
      3.  the invasion was the only possible plan with a half ass chance to accomplish a system change in the political and societal cesspool churning out terrorists

      It should also be mentioned that Bush and the coalition embarked on the Iraqi phase of the War on Terrorism in part because the left abdicated any role of responsibility in solving extremely difficults problems.

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 29 at 02:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. I’m interested in Addamo’s assertion that

      2.Kick Al Qaeda’s but.  Al Qaeda’s absence on Iraq prior to 2003 is a matter of record
      but he also posts a link telling us how Zarqawi had a base in Iraq prior to invasion which Bush apparently refused to bomb.
      Which is it Addamo?

      I’d also like to see some support for this claim

      And before you predictably use the ad hominem that the Lancet has been discredit, consider that IRB includes a handful of deaths from aerial bombardment, when in fact the US dropped something like 2 million munitions (i.e. 500 pound bombs) on Iraq in the first 18 months of conflict.  That comes to more that 2 every minute 24/7.

      Lets say the average aircraft in USAF carries 10 bombs that would require 200,000 instances of USAF aircraft dropping all their bombs in 18 months. Lets say the USAF had on average 500 aircraft in theatre during that time. That would mean they dropped their entire payload 400 times. Are you interested in buying the Eiffel tower?

      Posted by the nailgun on 2006 04 29 at 02:54 AM • permalink

 

    1. MentalFloss,

      you certainly dont know me prior to these postings. I certainly dont know you. I have no organisation other than of my desktop.

      I am not baiting you. I just dont want to have neighbours that feel self-justified in killing people.

      Why should Australian citizens kill those of another country in their own private war?
      Why is it OK if its done beyond Australia’s shores? Why shouldn’t willingly engaging in a privite war not be prosecuted like any other crime?

      If we had such laws perhaps we could deal with Mr Hicks more appropriately.

      As for defending yourself where you already live…sure…when you are attacked here…its already law you can defend yourself.

      Our army (and you if you wish to join) are defending us elsewhere.

      To save you any further paranoia and avoid being lumped with whoever is bothering you,
      my name is Clint Walsh.

      cheers

      Posted by galoot on 2006 04 29 at 03:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. Often i wondered why some of those who were born into freedoms unheard of in previous generations were unable to thank their lucky stars and enjoy them.
      And then i thought that there exist a class of people who cannot exist without the idea of oppression however much freedom they exist in.
      The idea of being besieged and persecuted is the oxygen they need to flourish and intellectualize and whine about their societies. Too much freedom is oppression to them.
      And then there is cowardice and appeasement-when confronted or threatened, how easy is it to attack those who wish them no harm than face head on the aggression.
      How easily such people are united through hatred of their own governments or peaceful minorities who do not fight back.

      Posted by davo on 2006 04 29 at 03:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. Clint

      I am a veteran. I have served the cause of freedom both in and out of uniform, as did my father and his father before him.

      What you term a “private war” is, in this context, undefined in modern geopolitics.

      It so happens that I have suffered personal loss—on 9/11, in Bali, Israel and Iraq—at the hands of those for whom Robert Fisk and his ilk are apologists and whose perverted goals they aid and abet with their peculiar form of propaganda.

      My country is part of a global war being fought on many fronts. Were I able to enlist again, I would.

      As it is, there are areas of operations where I could be of assistance, despite my age. I consider Kurdistan to be one of the more important of these, both tactically and strategically.

      I am also an historian, not unfamiliar with the record of Turkish atrocities against minority populations within their borders (mandated by treaty in 1918).

      With all due respect, unlike yourself, I consider my committment to the cause of freedom from tyranny and oppression to be part of a very “public” war.

      I can only repeat sentiments expressed earlier:

      Throughout history people of honour have offered their services, in whatever capacity, to causes they felt were worthy.

      You intimate that I would be acting as a terrorist or guerilla. The circumstances here are quite different.

      No one asked Americans to fight in the RAF before Pearl Harbour—yet many fought and died despite their country not being at war.

      The same applies to the Lafayette Escadrille in WW1.

      If you are content to sit back and watch history unfold to an evil and inhuman end, so be it.

      I would, and will, do otherwise.

      For my part the argument is closed.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 06:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. #83 Four Corners to celebrate Mr Al Zarquawi.

      Posted by crash on 2006 04 29 at 07:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. Jesus H Christ.  Is it a full moon or something?

      Two cretinous trolls in the one thread.  Both self righteous and yet self loathing twats.

      I just dont want to have neighbours that feel self-justified in killing people…

      Well, shit, it’s an imperfect world, isn’t it?  I don’t like neighbours that don’t cut their lawn regularly.

      Why should Australian citizens kill those of another country in their own private war?

      You know, I’m buggered if I know, so I asked my dog this tonight.  He came up with a very perceptive answer – “Rough”.  How’s that?

      Why shouldn’t willingly engaging in a privite war not be prosecuted like any other crime?

      I had a privit hedge once, then I cut it down.  Is that what you mean by a privite war?

      There are plenty of Australians right here in Geelong that have murdered people…

      Is this the neighbours again?  Sounds like you might need to move.

      Oh, and wronwright.  I’ll have you know that my ‘To do’ list is bloody well clean, thank you very much.  I delegated it.  To MarkL.  So get stuffed.

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 29 at 07:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. Meatfloss and Drift

      Dont you have a problem with an Australian following your lead fighting for the other side (from your favoured side)? Afterall if you meet out in the field you may be trying to kill each other.

      How about having a problem with an Australian Muslim following a reasonable (in his eyes) call to arms? Wanna be pals when he gets back from his good works?

      I did not say whether i agree with MeatFloss regarding the merits of the side. Just that if its ok for you to go…so it is for everyone regardless of merits of their cause.

      Posted by galoot on 2006 04 29 at 08:14 AM • permalink

 

    1. 91B30
      “Wrong again Addamo the estimates in the Lancet were between 8K and 194K, a laughable range.  And those weren’t the only problems with the study as the linked article notes.”

      From one of the authors of the Lancet:

      “Please understand how extremely conservative we were: we did a survey estimating that ~285,000 people have died due to the first 18 months of invasion and occupation and we reported it as at least ~100,000.”

      and

      “There are now at least 8 independent estimates of the number or rate of deaths induced by the invasion of Iraq. The source most favored by the war proponents (Iraqbodycount.org) is the lowest. Our estimate is the third from highest. Four of the estimates place the death toll above 100,000.”

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 08:33 AM • permalink

 

    1. Dave S.

      “What a pitty [sic] Rumsfeld was still in the private sector at the time. He wasn’t SecDef until 2001.””

      “Yep. Deeper and deeper swamp of dumb. “
      You’

      Re not even good at this Dave S.  Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Special Envoy to the Middle East (1983 – 1984).

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 08:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. Dave S.

      “ When the Lancet study came out, with its 8000-100,000 range, Tim Blair and others wondered how high it would eventually creep up after it started making the rounds in leftie circles. Now Addamo tells us it was between 100-200K.

      Anyone want to wager how long before it’s quoted at 300,000? “

      In case you’re having trouble doing the math, the Lancet was published in 2004.  If it concluded that 100,000 had been killed in that period, if those numbers were accurate, then surely it’s feasible that an extrapolation would take it close to that number by September of this year.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 08:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. Yikes, 144 comments and accelerating!  Has anybody had time to notice this consistency problem?
      59 Addamo

      I am opposed to illegal military agression.

      2006 04 28 at 06:33 PM

      Are you?  Not consistently, you’re not, as witness your earlier complaint, posted in comment # 31:

      “Finally, let’s be reminded that Zarqawi would be six foot under by now had Bush actually gone ahead with plans to bomb Zarqawi’s camp in Kurdistan, prior to the invasion.”

      2006 04 28 at 08:58 AM

      Ah, so you’d have been in favor of that bombing then?  Or not?  After all, to cite the expert in your linked article, “Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.”  So the way I see it, you get to blame Bush for NOT ordering this bombing, right after you admit that the bombing would have been a good idea.  So here’s your chance to do that.
      tap   tap   tap   tap   tap
      While we’re waiting, here’s Addamo’s supporting link

      http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

      By Jim Miklaszewski
      Pentagon Correspondent
      NBC News
      Updated: 7:14 p.m. ET March 2, 2004

      Ha!  You’ve got the hottest and timeliest information available … in March of 2004, I see.  Impressive. Now according to this article,

      “In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.”

      Way I see it, you posting this article, in support of your complaint, strongly implies that you expect us to find this article credible.  Otherwise, you’d hardly rely on it to support your case, of course.  So, now, do YOU believe that there was a weapons lab, at Kirma, producing ricin and cyanide?  A simple yes or no will do.
      tap   tap   tap   tap   tap
      Worse yet, according to your article:

      “Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.  The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it.  “

      That damned pussyfooting pacifistic White House.  You agree, apparently, that the problem was that Bush was being all too timid in his dealings with Zarqawi, right?  Too slow on the trigger?  That has to be it, because otherwise, well, that would be like you were blaming him for NOT doing the thing you were NOT wanting him to do.  Which would of course mark you as an opportunistic sleazebag, which must be wrong, right?  After all, according to you

      “In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.”

      So, now, you do agree that Zarqawi and his ricin was a threat to European civilians, or you don’t.  Which is it?.
      tap   tap   tap   tap   tap

      ” And despite the Bush administration’s tough talk about hitting the terrorists before they strike, Zarqawi’s killing streak continues today. © 2006 MSNBC Interactive”

      Well then, it’s just a shame that Bush and Rumsfeld weren’t listening to you and Jim Miklaszewski, isn’t it?  Back in June of 2002, I mean.  Which of course makes me wonder about one thing: what do you and Jim recommend for Bush and Rumsfeld and company to about Zarqawi, this year, in 2006?  Would you recommend doing enough “illegal military agression” to whack the Zark man now, or would you rather we just left him alone?
      That or you’ve got a clever third option, of course, but if so, what is it?

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 08:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. the nailgun

      “but he also posts a link telling us how Zarqawi had a base in Iraq prior to invasion which Bush apparently refused to bomb.
      Which is it Addamo?”

      It’s not that difficult mate.  Zarqawi was not a member of Al Qaeda at the time.

      Furthermore, while Zarqawi was in Iraq, he was not there as a guest of Saddam Huseein.

      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6189795/print/1/displaymode/1098

      “That would mean they dropped their entire payload 400 times. Are you interested in buying the Eiffel tower?”

      The numbers of ordinates dropped was an official number noted by an article by Seymor Hersh.  Don’t flame the messenger.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 08:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. Uh, oh.  Looks like BlackAddermo’s renderings and simulations are taking another breather, he’s got a full charge in the rectal probe and he’s duelling Lancet again.

      Golly.

      At least he’s taken the earlier suggestion and has been posting ALL OVER WebDiary today, whining his heart out.

      So the Cats got a thrashing today.  Why take it out on us?

      Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 04 29 at 08:58 AM • permalink

 

    1. 146 Addamo

      In case you’re having trouble doing the math, the Lancet was published in 2004.  If it concluded that 100,000 had been killed in that period, if those numbers were accurate, then surely

      2006 04 29 at 08:43 AM

      Stop.  Rewind.  Note that your “surely” is contingent on two “if”s.  Extrapolating from the Lancet’s figures is kind of like figuring the current price the Brooklyn Bridge based on the price they quoted you two years ago.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 09:15 AM • permalink

 

    1. 54 Paco

      Say, what am I supposed to do with this kid? I’m getting calls from Blockbuster Video about overdue DVD’s (including a very expensive new release called “Wet Burkas and Sheer Chadors”). And what’s he got against pork chops?

      Little bastid got the hang of those lock-picking tools faster than I woulda expected, I gotta admit.  Still, I’m pretty sure you’ll think of something, pretty soon.  Before Armageddon, one hopes.

      136 Ens Martinet W Rongway

      No wonder none of the TO DO list I left the minions have been crossed off.
      (gives stern look in the direction of the layabouts)

      Sir?  Your fly’s unzipped.

      134 Salty

      MentalFloss, I have no idea what Galoot is going on about, and I don’t care.

      As the Master of Sinanju aptly remarked, “When two dogs attack, one barks and the other one bites.”  In the present infestation, it looks like “Galoot” is the distractor, the side-show, the chaff.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 09:45 AM • permalink

 

    1. Stoop Davy Dave

      “Ah, so you’d have been in favor of that bombing then?  Or not?”

      Of course I would have been in favor of taking out Zarqawi.  But bombing a base camp of a known terrorist is a stretch from all out invasion, woudln’t you agree?

      Bombing a base to avert a war is a pretty sound position, seeing as coalition planes were already controlling northern Iraq and bombing it frequently. This would have hardly been a major undertaking, while still falling well short of an all out attack on the country.

      “  So, now, do YOU believe that there was a weapons lab, at Kirma, producing ricin and cyanide? “

      Who the hell knows?  I do believe the camp was there sure.  Whether there was a weapons lab producing ricin and cyanide hardly contradicts the suggestion that Bash turned down an opportunity to avert the mayhem Zarqawi would unleash.

      “ You agree, apparently, that the problem was that Bush was being all too timid in his dealings with Zarqawi, right?  Too slow on the trigger? “

      The problem was that the Bush administration cynical chose not to go after him because it would have reduced Powell’s already anemic talking points in front of the UN.

      “So, now, you do agree that Zarqawi and his ricin was a threat to European civilians, or you don’t.  Which is it?”

      Davy, why are you working so hard to present the existence of ricin as a contradiction to the issue of whether Bush chose not to bomb Zarqawi’s base?

      “ what do you and Jim recommend for Bush and Rumsfeld and company to about Zarqawi, this year, in 2006?”

      I don’t pretend to know what to do about Zarqawi.  What do you do when have a psychopath cornered and let him go?

      “Would you recommend doing enough “illegal military aggression” to whack the Zark man now, or would you rather we just left him alone?”

      Maybe we should try finding the guy first and seeing is he’s alive? I mean seriously, the Iraqi police (aka keystone cops) had him last year (or was it 2004) and let him go.  No one seems to have identified this guy since when 2003?

      This video is an all too familiar joke, reminiscent of the footage we are used to seeing of Saddam brandishing a rifle in front of an adoring sheer squad and does little to prove if the guy is still

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 09:56 AM • permalink

 

    1. Davy Dave

      “Extrapolating from the Lancet’s figures is kind of like figuring the current price the Brooklyn Bridge based on the price they quoted you two years ago.”

      Sure, perhaps you could point to the reseach that suggests the number of deaths in Iraq has come down from 2004.  Amazing what they can do with cryogencs and stem cells these days.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 10:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. 52 me

      I’m 40% sure we kicked his ribs in last week, under his old nom d’comment.

      Ever since the term “clusterfuck” got into the dialogue, I’ve moved up to an 85% certainty regarding ***yf***‘s new avatar.  But that’s not a complaint.  I like pseudonyms, and I like persistence even better.  The more lefty memes he regurgitates, and the more often and more completely they get shot down before his eyes, the greater the chance of him actually learning something…
      . .
      . … eventually.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 10:15 AM • permalink

 

    1. … eventually.

      Don’t place any money on that, SDD.  If Addamo is the virtual reincarnation of an earlier leftie clown, said person has a severe learning disability.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 29 at 11:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. I just checked in to see how the trollfuck was coming, and if the sock puppet had appeared yet.  And, by golly, there he is, sounding twice as dumb as the first one.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 29 at 11:25 AM • permalink

 

    1. Re not even good at this Dave S.  Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Special Envoy to the Middle East (1983 – 1984).

      The Halabja poison gas attack took place in 1988.

      You’re stuck on stupid, Addamo.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 29 at 11:37 AM • permalink

 

    1. Well, gee, Dave, what’s an error of 4 years when you consider the whole of human history?  By that (stupid) standard, Addamo is spot on.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 29 at 12:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. You all passed over Addammmmmmmmo’s assertion that we (the US, certainly not the UN) were killing a million Iraqis a minute with those pesky sanctions.

      So now we kill a million a second with our bazillion bombs we’re dropping on Baghdad in a pale imitation of Dresden every day.

      God, I am so bored of this guy.  Wrongright, can’t you do something to at least make him more interesting?

      Posted by ushie on 2006 04 29 at 01:24 PM • permalink

 

    1. #142 Oh, and wronwright.  I’ll have you know that my ‘To do’ list is bloody well clean, thank you very much.  I delegated it.  To MarkL.  So get stuffed. — Posted by Stop Continental Drift!

      I think it would be a good idea for all minions, rabble, scalawags, and rogues (the four levels of RWDB beneath the level of seraphim henchman to remember than the coordinates of each and every one of you have been entered into the orbital space station laser computers.  The index finger on my right hand dangles precariously over the firing button, held back only by my left hand (and ok, Karl’s malevolent look aimed my way).  My hand is getting tired, my finger just might fall.  Accidentally.  Sadly.

      You would all do well to remember the fate of Stoop Davy Dave’s tobacco shed.

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 29 at 01:31 PM • permalink

 

    1. #159 God, I am so bored of this guy.  Wrongright, can’t you do something to at least make him more interesting?—Posted by ushie

      (What?!!  Is she shitting me?)

      First of all …

      I don’t report to you ushie.  You’re a rabble or something or other.

      (must make note to begin delegating the task of responding to comments by rabble to MarkL, I’m way above this)

      We have you registered somewhere but I can’t know all the inhabitants of the lower echelons of our hierarchy.  And I don’t want to know.  There’s too many.  Especially after the 2004 election.  This is worse that the US – Mexican border.  There are too many applicants to the RWDB.  We got to stop taking applicants.

      (make note to ask Karl to post Andrea at the sign up table with her sword unsheathed, shaking her head NO)

      Second …

      It’s wronwright, not wrongwright.  You would do well to remember that.  grrrrrr

      Third …

      Yes, I could do something.  We have that mind control ray gun on the orbital space station.  But ever since I aimed it at Margo and she went, you know, nutsy and quit Web Dairy Queen, Karl frowns

      (recalls the frown, shudders visibly)

      at any unauthorized use of the mind control machine.

      Fourth …

      Yes, I could debate him.  But I’m so bored with it, I haven’t read any of it except for a sentence or two.  And come to think of it, I didn’t read any of your comments except for a sentence or two.  That would be your apparent order issued to me.  Yes, I read that.

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 29 at 01:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Yes, I could debate him.  But I’m so bored with it, I haven’t read any of it except for a sentence or two.  And come to think of it, I didn’t read any of your comments except for a sentence or two.  That would be your apparent order issued to me.  Yes, I read that.”

      I didn’t make any other comments, because I kept falling asleep while reading that Adddddmmmamososo’s comments and waking up with a nasty case of keyboard face.

      And I am PROUD, I sez PROUD, to be part of the rabble!

      Posted by ushie on 2006 04 29 at 04:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. Remember in Raiders of the Lost Ark, when Indie, running through the souk, finds himself facing the big, grinning, wild man with two – count em’ TWO – flashing simitars coming at him.  First you see a little thrill of fear cross Indie’s face, then reality sinks in.  Bored and busy, Indie pulls out his gun, and in one of the truly sublime moments in filmdom, shoots the bastard.  (HA!  To hell with proportionality!)

      Small metaphor for this war, and for what some one ought to do with this troll.

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 04 29 at 04:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. Here’s how you’re doing so far, Addamo:

      1/ Saltydog [9] & [74] & [106] and MentalFloss [21] caught you being wrong about Turkish / Kurdish Geography.  But hey, probably the REST of your geo-polotico-economo-strategic analysis is credible and correct, right?

      2/ RyanOH [34] caught you making up reasons why people disbelieve and discredit Fisk, in avoidance of noticing the reasons already given.  In case you were wondering why people treat you like your opinions were unreliable.

      3/ The_Real_JeffS [35] laid out the circularity of your logic.

      4/ The_Real_JeffS [38] then laid out the contradiction in your “position,” well before I began banging away at it.  Not that I’m jealous of that or even properly humbled by it, no fuck no, I’m just saying, is all.

      5/ Paco [48] disputes your analysis of the situation on the ground in Iraq, in broad outlining terms.

      6/ The_Real_JeffS [53] then disputes your analysis of the situation on the ground in Iraq, in specifically detailed terms.

      7/ 91B30 [60] & [69] & [100]disputes your definitions of defeat and victory, and their application, and provides links to references.

      8~12/ Forbes, from whom I stole this whole idea, [66] summarizes:

          1) Losing in Iraq.
      2) Illegal military agression.
      3) War is huge. When was last time $300 billion was spent over 3 years?
      4) Halliburton was on the verge of bankruptcy.
      5)Statistics gathered from Saudi Arabia…
      6)Percentage of foreign fighters is insignificant.

      Five out of those six items are new, so that’s, let’s see, a running total of of um um of twelve things, major and minor, that you’ve got wrong so far.

      13/ Thefrollickingmole [77] aptly ridicules your “Statistics gathered from Saudi Arabia of captured fighters.”

      14/ Mentalfloss [80] describes the path that leads to the discovery of truth in exquisite detail.  Damn.  ”    I find it very useful to try to reduce potential premises, and (sub)conclusions to a few words capturing the key thought, and then to look for redundancy among the potential premises, and (sub)conclusions. Once the key thoughts are recognized, then they can be organized into a charitable interpretation of the post that also captures the “flow” of the thread as a whole. (This is the opposite of “thread-highjacking)” I was fixing to berate you for not following that advice until I noticed how much of it I’m not following myownself.

      15/ The_Real_JeffS [81] and Saltydog [106] complain about your excessive politeness.  Okay frankly I don’t go along with that.  Honestly and goodnessly, it’s wack to complain about excessive politeness.  The alternative to excessive politeness is not preferable.  Please stop doing that.

      16/ 91B30 [84] finds problems with your presented sources.

      17/ Paco [86] remarks aptly on your inattention to detail.

      18/ 91B30 [100] & [111] takes exception to your version of Fisk’s story about the Baghdad morgues, in particular, and Lancet’s casualty figures in general, on logical and evidentiary grounds.

      19/ El Cid [102] quotes your own sources back to you, to hilarious effect.

      20/ Dave S [103] takes issue with your epistemological methodology, six layers of it.

      21/ El Cid [104] takes note of the “weapons lab at Kirma” thing, beating me to the punch by a considerable margin.  That fukker.

      22/ Dave S [120] joins 91B30 (18 above) from a somewhat different angle, plus feeds your own statistics back to you, always a comical sight.

      23/ Dave S [124] & [157] spots, then with The_Real_JeffS [158]elaborates upon, a problem with your somewhat under-detailed Rumsfeld time-line. Let me just briefly remark thus: HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW !!!!!

      24/ nailgun [137] finds the problem in your aerial bombardment arithmetic.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 05:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. 152 Addamo

      me

      “Ah, so you’d have been in favor of that bombing then?  Or not?”

      Of course I would have been in favor of taking out Zarqawi.  But bombing a base camp of a known terrorist is a stretch from all out invasion, woudln’t you agree?

      That’s weirdly inconsistant with your ” I am opposed to illegal military agression.”  Would dropping U.S. bombs into the sovreign territory of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq have been acceptable to you, under some “international law” rationale?  If so, what would that rationale be?

      “Bombing a base to avert a war is a pretty sound position, seeing as coalition planes were already controlling northern Iraq and bombing it frequently. This would have hardly been a major undertaking, while still falling well short of an all out attack on the country.”

      So really you only disagree, with us evil neocon imperialist warmongers, over the DEGREE to which this international aggression is carried out, eh?, rather than as a matter of principle.  It sure sounds that way here.

      “ So, now, do YOU believe that there was a weapons lab, at Kirma, producing ricin and cyanide? “

      Who the hell knows?  I do believe the camp was there sure.  Whether there was a weapons lab producing ricin and cyanide hardly contradicts the suggestion that Bash turned down an opportunity to avert the mayhem Zarqawi would unleash.

      It sure contradicts the hell out of your assertion that there were no WMDs in Iraq, though, doesn’t it?  As for your back-pedalling “who knows?” well, supposedly the experts you were citing know, that’s who the hell knows.  Here’s what they said: “In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.”  That’s Jim Miklaszewski, your source.

      “So, now, you do agree that Zarqawi and his ricin was a threat to European civilians, or you don’t.  Which is it?”

      Davy, why are you working so hard to present the existence of ricin as a contradiction to the issue of whether Bush chose not to bomb Zarqawi’s base?

      The ricin, if it was present, is a clear contradiction to your assertion that there were no WMDs in Iraq.  That’s why you’re so anxious to avoid confirming OR denying its existence.

      “ what do you and Jim recommend for Bush and Rumsfeld and company to about Zarqawi, this year, in 2006?”

      I don’t pretend to know what to do about Zarqawi.

      Sounds like “My advice isn’t worth dog poo,” doesn’t it?

        What do you do when have a psychopath cornered and let him go?

      You corner him again, and again, as many times as it takes.  Then you make sure he’s the right guy.  Then you kill him.

      “Would you recommend doing enough “illegal military aggression” to whack the Zark man now, or would you rather we just left him alone?”

      Maybe we should try finding the guy first and seeing is he’s alive? I mean seriously, the Iraqi police (aka keystone cops) had him last year (or was it 2004) and let him go.  No one seems to have identified this guy since when 2003?

      Hey Mr Evasive, just answer the question.  It’s “yes,” or it’s “no,” and all you have to do is pick one.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 05:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. 155 The Real

      Don’t place any money on that, SDD.

      Hey that reminds me, has anybody seen my piggybank?  And why am I smelling Wronwright’s cheezy cologne in this room?

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 29 at 05:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. Stoop Davy Dave
      I don’t know if I should be flattered for the time you have taken to document all these posts.
      1/ A: Yes I did confuse Southern Border with Kurdistan with border with Border of Southern Kurdistan.  My bad.
      2/ A: I agree entirely with RyanOH’s comment.  All journalists and historians who maintain a high public profile should be held to account.  Same should go for decision makers who take us to war.
      3/ A: The_Real_JeffS suggested that by my idol’s “logic”, killing Zarqawi would be immaterial, as we need not worry about him.  I never said Zarqawi was immaterial.  He has been blamed for the deaths of over a thousand people, which makes him anything but immaterial.  He should have been taken out when the Bush administration had the chance,
      The_Real_JeffS tried to build a straw man and failed.
      4/ A: Fisk never denied that Zarqawi should be killed.  Another straw man effort by The_Real_JeffS.
      5/ A: Disputes some and agrees with others.  Live and let live.
      6/ A: And I acknowledged by superficial understanding and stand corrected.

      7/ A: Ask ten people what victory in Iraq means and you’ll get 10 answers.  The links he provided point to promising outcomes, but given the oscillating numbers of combat ready battalions in Iraq (going from 6 to 1 in the space of 12 months) there is ample reason to be skeptical of such optimism.
      8~12/A: Forbes stated I was too young to remember the Gulf War cease fire violations.  He was wrong
      The rest were opinions, which by his own admission,  are as common as a certain part of the human anatomy
      13/ A: The frollickingmole is entitled to ridicule me all he likes.  He didn’t actually offer any counter argument.
      14/ A: An excellent post indeed.
      15/ A: I’m not nearly as accomplished as most on the list at hurling venom, and quite frankly, I’ve outgrown the desire to enter into such discourse.  I’ll leave that to the pros.
      16/A: I provided updates to the first.  His counter argument to the 2nd and 3rd was just noise.
      17/ A: My bad.

      18/ A: I intentionally stayed clear of use Fisk’s first hand account. Lancets critics agree with the methods used to compile the report, but dispute the conclusions.  This is in spite of the fact that the Lancet has used this same technique in the past and that it’s statistics have unanimously accepted in reporting of other conflicts.
      For example, critics that have attacked the Lancet following their published report on Iraq, continue to cite the findings from the Lancet in reference to the genocide in Sudan.
      19/ A: Poor El Cid suggests that Sheur was is suspect for failing to capture Bin Laden during his 3 year tenure as head of the Bin Laden unit at the CIA, but somehow overlooks that Bush has failed just as dismally after 4.5 years of trying and with infinite more resources at his disposal.
      20/ A: Dave S seems to be unable to contemplate the nuanced difference between a surgical strike and an invasion.
      21/ A: That wasn’t post 104, but in regard to the weapons lab at Kirma, how does the fact that
      a)Zarqawi had a camp in Kirma contradict that
      b)Zarqawi had a camp in Kirma and that Bush refused to bomb it prior to the invasion?
      22/ A: Not really.  Dave S suggested the statistics were inconclusive, and that’s a fair point.  The again, nothing like getting the news from the horses mouth is there?
      http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,175-2157116,00.html
      23/ A: As I point out in another post, Rumsfeld was US envoy at the time.  Of course, The_Real_JeffS and Dave S conveniently sidestep that I also pointed to US complicity as a whole for turning a blind eye to the gassing of the Kurds, not just Rummy.  A master class in cherry picking arguments.
      24/ A: Nailgun needs to take his complaint to the US Air Force for reporting it.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 06:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Dave S.

      What was the chemical agent used in Halabja?  Affording to the CIA, the agent used against the Kurds at Halabja was a blood agent, suggesting it was work of the Iranians.

      Saddam had mustard gas only at the time.  The attack also took place during the Irq/Iran war and seeing as Halabja is on the border (i.e. contested territory), it is likely that th eattack was part of a cross border conflict, as oposed to a targetted assault by Iraq.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 06:21 PM • permalink

 

    1. Stoop Davy Dave
      “That’s weirdly inconsistant with your “ I am opposed to illegal military agression.” Would dropping U.S. bombs into the sovreign territory of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq have been acceptable to you, under some “international law” rationale?  If so, what would that rationale be?”

      You’re being a tad pedantic are you not?  The CIA has routinely carried out targeted assignation.  What makes this any different?

      Coalition planes were controlling the airspace I the region.  They were doing so legally.  They were also routinely dropping bombs on the region, apparently also legally.

      “So really you only disagree, with us evil neocon imperialist warmongers, over the DEGREE to which this international aggression is carried out, eh?, rather than as a matter of principle.  It sure sounds that way here.”

      A surgical strike, especially when you have the bombers in the air, seems like the logical thing to do, especially when you have already ramped up the bombing (as the US did from September 2002) in the area.  A surgical strike to take out a maniac like Zarqawi is several orders of magnitude less than an invasion.

      Furthermore, US forces had entered Iraq long before March 2003.  If they had taken out Zarqawi then and averted war, I would have had no problem with it.

      “It sure contradicts the hell out of your assertion that there were no WMDs in Iraq, though, doesn’t it?”

      Huh?  Cyanide is a WMD?  Okeeeeeeeeeeey.  You know you can find this stuff in just about any university lab?  So maybe you are suggesting that it becomes WMD when you include it into a delivery system?  How many liters did they find?  How many missiles?

      Did the Cush administration say anything about finding WMD when they found Zarqawi’s stash?  Didn’t think so.  Did Charles Duelfer include anything about Zarqawi’s stash in his report?

      “You corner him again, and again, as many times as it takes.  Then you make sure he’s the right guy.  Then you kill him.”

      Sounds like a brilliant idea.  So how many more times do you think they need to corner Zarqawi before they are sure he’s the right guy?  Just curious.

      “Hey Mr Evasive, just answer the question.  It’s “yes,” or it’s “no,” and all you have to do is pick one. “

      Hey Mr Pedantic.  Zarqawi’s name get’s used every time the US want to use the Fallujah option on a town in Iraq.  If they haven’t been able to nail this guy after three years of truing with 150,000 troops and god knows what else, either it’s because the guy is either dead, not in Iraq or because they want him alive.
      Now a few questions for you?

      1.Do you agree with Bush’s decision not to attack Zarqawi’s camp prior to the invasion?

      2.Do you agree that being able to report Zarqawi’s presence in Iraq to the UN was sufficient reason not to take him out?

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 06:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. Regarding the number of ordnance dropped on Iraq during he first 18 months of operations, here is a link.

      UP IN THE AIR
      Where is the Iraq war headed next?
      by SEYMOUR M. HERSH

      http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/051205fa_fact

      “One insight into the scope of the bombing in Iraq was supplied by the Marine Corps during the height of the siege of Falluja in the fall of 2004. “With a massive Marine air and ground offensive under way,” a Marine press release said, “Marine close air support continues to put high-tech steel on target. . . . Flying missions day and night for weeks, the fixed wing aircraft of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing are ensuring battlefield success on the front line.” Since the beginning of the war, the press release said, the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing alone had dropped more than five hundred thousand tons of ordnance.”

      Do the math.

      Assuming that most of the ordnance comprised 500 lb bombs (from 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing alone) , and assuming that the fall refers to late September.  This comes to more than 2 million ordnance over 18 months, or more than one 500 lb bomb every minute 24/7 for 18 months.

      And this is for 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing alone.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 07:02 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo’s increasingly fevered shrieking as he tries to keep his nonsensical arguments together reminds me of those anti-meat protesters when the angle grinders came into play.

      Well done, folks.

      Posted by PW on 2006 04 29 at 08:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. PW,

      How does answering questions posted by others constitute shrieking?

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 08:07 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo,

      Perhaps it’s time now to take a moment to reduce your premises and conclusions to a few words—ideally capturing the key thought or thread topic (Fisk and his relevance, remember?).

      I fear you have fallen prey to a pre-internet researcher’s nightmare: you’ve dropped all your index cards and are re-shuffling them while still typing your thesis.

      Good luck.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 29 at 08:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. I hear you MentalFloss,

      You are right of course, but seeing as I’m clearly putting forth unpopular statements, and being heavily scruitinized, I am aiming to comprensive.

      Post 164 from Stoop Davy Dave clearly demanded a long winded response.

      Thanks again for the advice, and BTW. the very best of luck with your adventure.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 29 at 08:38 PM • permalink

 

    1. Stoop…..excellent summary.  Thanks!

      PW—thanks, but I think Addamo did the set up for us.  Talk about leading the lamb to slaughter……

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 29 at 08:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. #75 That shoulda read (Andrea)
      “a spear and bow and arrows (QUIVERS)-not (shivers)—-more poetic mmm?

      Posted by crash on 2006 04 29 at 10:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. As I point out in another post, Rumsfeld was US envoy at the time.

      You cannot possibly be this stupid.

      You said, “Of course I am appaled by Saddam’s gassing of the Kurds. What a pitty that Rummy and his boss turned a blind eye to it at the time.” I pointed out that Rumsfeld wasn’t SecDef until 2001. You come back with “Rumsfeld was a ME envoy in 1983”, which might have had some marginal relevance if not for the fact that Halabja, as I pointed out, occured in 1988. And what is your brilliant defense? “Rumsfeld was a US envoy at the time.”

      No. He. Wasn’t. 1983 is five years BEFORE 1988. Are you familiar with the concept of unidirectional linear time?

      Of course, The_Real_JeffS and Dave S conveniently sidestep that I also pointed to US complicity as a whole for turning a blind eye to the gassing of the Kurds, not just Rummy.  A master class in cherry picking arguments.

      Who’s cherrypicking? You blame “Rumsfeld and his boss.” It is clearly pointed out to you that Rumsfeld wasn’t on the scene. Your defense? “It was so Rummy’s fault, and besides, I didn’t say just Rummy, and besides, it was probably the Iranians anyway.” You’re not just cherrypicking , you’re slinging shit against the wall and trying to make something stick.

      Sorry, Addamo, but someone who can’t master the basic principles of a timeline really has no credibility when speaking of anything else. Your points have been logically and factually refuted, your responses contain the exact same errors as the original propositions, so any further discussion with you is pointless.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 04 29 at 10:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Halabja, as I pointed out, occured in 1988. And what is your brilliant defense? “Rumsfeld was a US envoy at the time.”

      And Halabja took place during the Iraq/Iran war did it not?  The Defense Intelligence Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency originally reported that Iran was to blame for Halabja.  As far as I’m aware, the only subseqeunt report was by human rights watch, who were unable to come to a firm conclusion as to the perpetrator.

      Perhaps you have evidence that proves that Iraq was indeed the culprit.

      What were the findings from the attack?  That the victims showed signs of being killed by a blood agent.  Saddam was using mustard gas at the time, suggesting that that town had been struck by the Iranians, who were using cyanide.

      Posted by Addamo on 2006 04 30 at 12:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. Jesus Christ, Addamo, can you not even do the laziest Google search? There are a number of reports pointing to Saddam’s culpability for Halabja. In fact, it’s Pelletiere’s report which stands alone on the other side. Seeing as how it seems to have been written largely on the basis of examining images, that’s not too surprising.

      Try wikipedia to begin your education.

      Contrary to your assertion, the Human Rights Watch report came to a pretty firm conclusion that there was no evidence Iran was the perpetrator.

      Also, Iraq was using cocktails of various gases during the war, including Sarin and Tabun. Not mustard gas exclusively, as you erroneously state. It’s speculated as quite likely that if Iraq used a weapons mixture including Tabun at Halabja, impurities in the Tabun could have caused the ‘signs of being killed by a blood agent’ which you cite as conclusive evidence that Iran was the perpetrator.

      Posted by Crispytoast on 2006 04 30 at 01:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result.

      Sir Winston Churchill

      I remember more a sense of relief than exhilaration, but maybe that’s just me…

      Saddam had a whole range of gas options at his fingertips.  Chem weapons are easy when you have a half-way decent industrial base, lots of money and the determination to get them and use them.  However, once you have them:
      They don’t bring you very good PR, they degrade your own forces abilities to operate (trust me, it ain’t easy to do anything in MOPP 4) and if you use a persistent agent, you ruin the real estate you are hoping to control until you can expend the effort to clean it up.
      Saddam, being a despot, didn’t really care all that much….

      Posted by Major John on 2006 04 30 at 08:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. Addamo update:
      In your reply (#s 167) to the list of an even two dozen items of wrongitude that folks have caught you out on, your reply provides the following:

      Admissions / concessions: 6 [#s 1, 2, 5, 6, 14, & 17]
      Evasions: 7 [#s 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, & 24]
      Denials / disputations:  11 [#s 3, 4, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, & 23]
      That’s progress, but obviously I’ll need to re-address some of these points. Fortunately there seems to be a new Fisk thread opening up, somewhere up-screen from here.
      Meanwhile, it seems your admissions, evasions, and disputations are followed up (# 169) with two impertinent questions.  Since they’re easy questions, here’s that:

      1.Do you agree with Bush’s decision not to attack Zarqawi’s camp prior to the invasion?

      If such a decision was made by Bush, I disagree with that decision.  But of course, I do not believe that such a decision was made by Bush.

      2.Do you agree that being able to report Zarqawi’s presence in Iraq to the UN was sufficient reason not to take him out?

      If deliberate efforts were made to avoid killing Zarqawi, for any motive, I disagree with those efforts.  But of course, I don’t believe in that conspiracy.
      Wait, you had another question, didn’t you?  Ah:

      me:

      “That’s weirdly inconsistant with your ” I am opposed to illegal military agression.” Would dropping U.S. bombs into the sovreign territory of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq have been acceptable to you, under some “international law” rationale?  If so, what would that rationale be?”

      You’re being a tad pedantic are you not?  The CIA has routinely carried out targeted assignation.  What makes this any different?

      Holding you to the content of your earlier remarks IS kind of pedantic, so yeah, I’m being that.  And you suddenly approving of CIA assassinations is what makes it different.

      Furthermore, US forces had entered Iraq long before March 2003.  If they had taken out Zarqawi then and averted war, I would have had no problem with it.

      1/ There is no reason to believe, or to pretend to believe, that taking out Zarqawi would have averted the present war.
      2/ IF, in some incredibly unlikely scenario, taking out Zarqawi had prevented the war, there is no reason to believe that you would “have had no problem with it.”  Because if this administration claimed credit for averting a war, on those grounds or any other, you would not believe them.  And if you did believe them, you would not admit it, in this forum or in any other.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 05 01 at 08:33 AM • permalink

 

Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.